 Poster: A snowHead
|
Had a crash course on waxing skis from MartinM at the weekend. He tuned my edges as well as they weren't that sharp apparently. Martin didn't know what edge angles they came out of the factory with, and I didn't know (being a newbie); so he set them to 90.
I've since found out from Rossignol's web site that they are set to 88 and 2 coming out of the factory.
What difference, if any will I notice with different edge angles? (I've not used them since he tuned them)
Also, are the preferred angles down to the ski design, the level of experience of the skier, how aggressive they are, all of the above, or purely a personal preference thing?. It's still a black art to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
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?
|
|
@Awdbugga, you probably won't notice the difference in the edge angle but you should notice a sharper ski. It's easy to change them back to 88° of you want to so I wouldn't worry about it
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
All Rossi's are 1,1 (=1,89) out of the wrapper.
There isn't a ski on the market with a 90 degree side edge angle (that dates back to the old straight ski days) but there are some adjustable side edge guides on the market that still have a 90 degree setting which is useful for sharpening scrapers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Awdbugga wrote: |
@spyderjon, It's all voodoo to me. I simply went by an answer to a question about my skis on the Rossignol web site (below)-
Question - "Hi, What base & side edge angles do these skis leave the factory with? Thanks"
Answer - For the EXPERIENCE 80 HD (XPRESS), the base & side edge angles are: Lateral Angle: 2° +/- 0.5° Base Angle: 88° +/- 0.5°.
Enjoy your skiing! The Rossignol Team!"
That's off Rossignol's own web site, so I understandably assumed it must be correct.... |
Their reply is total bollox. Anyone who has a working knowledge of edge geometry will know that but it's really unfair for those new to the game like yourself who are seeking accurate information.
And it's not just Rossignol. I've seen similar replies from other major players. They appear to have total idiots working for them & more often than not they seem to be working in their marketing departments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@spyderjon, so will a beginner like me notice a difference if they have been set to 90 degrees? Would it be worth while to try and set them back to 89 and if yes, would that be easy to do? Whilst I am a beginner I am quite aggressive with my turns, overly sometimes.
Sorry to be a pain. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awdbugga, in soft snow the edges are just along for the ride as the whole of the sidewall of the ski digs in the snow. It's on hard snow & ice were the edges take effect - providing the pilot has the skill set to tip the skis on edge.
The most important thing is that the edges are burr free and sharp, irrespective of whether you have an 89, 88 or 87 degree side edge. After that, assuming everything else being equal, then the steeper the side edge angle the more the bite/cut in to the snow. And assuming reasonable service intervals there's no loss of durability between an 89, 88 or 87 side edge. Side edge angles greater of 86 or greater will need a diligent owner!
However, if your side edge angles are now really at 90 degrees then, when combined with the factory base edge angle of 1 degree, you'll have an obtuse subtended angle of 91 degrees - which even when maintained won't have much bite/cut so yes, I'd recommend steepening them up.
Note that steepening the side edge angles does not remove any life from the ski but reducing the side edge angle does. To increase the side edge angle it's highly likely that the sidewall will first have to be trimmed back to give some clearance but that's a standard requirement when hand tuning the majority of skis whether altering the side edge angle or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
@spyderjon, thanks for the explanation. I’ll have to see what MikeM comes back with. I may have misheard him. If they are now at 90 and 1, I’ll have to see how they ski. When I was at the CF last Friday, there was a large area of ice near the lower step. My skis handled it fine and edged in ok. I’ll have to suck it and see. If they don’t grip well on ice I’ll have to take them to Sail and Ski and see if they can tweak them for me, as I don’t have the equipment, or the experience yet. Fingers crossed they’re OK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@Awdbugga, I think you're confusing internal and external edge angle measurements. Your friend has most likely put 1, 1 on them which is a common setting.
1 base, 1 side (external angles) = 89 measured from the horizontal but the internal angle of the edge at the tip = 90.
Think of it as starting with a 90 degree piece of metal (the edge) that is laid flat next to your ski base. If the amount you tilt the edge upwards (1 degree) is the same as the amount you tilt it inwards (1 degree), then the actual edge has not changed, it is still 90 degrees internal.
I had the same issue last year with a new ski tech at my local shop in LT who told me that 1,1 = 88 at the tip. I told him that 1,3 = 88 at the tip, 1,1 = 90. The shop owner then came along, drew a diagram and told his tech that I was right  I run my skis on 1,2 which is 88 from the horizontal but 89 at the tip. i.e. Slightly sharper than "normal", if normal is 1,1.
Rossi's answer refers to the side edge angle when measured from both directions off the edge. Vertical side edge = 90. 2 degrees from vertical (their Lateral Angle) = 88 from the horizontal (their Base Angle). So they have not answered your question in the same way you asked it because they haven't referred to the base edge at all, only the side edge in two different ways.
To achieve this on your skis, you need to ask your friend to set them at 1 base, 2 side, which will be 89 at the tip. Slightly sharper than they are now. At your level, whether you'll notice any difference between 89 and 90 at the tip is highly debatable and probably subject to the snow conditions more than anything. A sharper tip gives more grip but it also gives more bite, which you may find harder to control. It's a trade-off. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MikeM has confirmed he set them to 90 and 0. I'll see how they are the next time in the CF for now. I'll check them out on the bare icy patches towards the end of the afternoon. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Awdbugga wrote: |
| MikeM has confirmed he set them to 90 and 0. |
In the normal way of expressing edge angles, that would be 0,0. If they came out of the factory at 1,2 that's pretty much impossible unless he did a base grind on a machine at the same time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| Raceplate wrote: |
| Awdbugga wrote: |
| MikeM has confirmed he set them to 90 and 0. |
In the normal way of expressing edge angles, that would be 0,0. If they came out of the factory at 1,2 that's pretty much impossible unless he did a base grind on a machine at the same time. |
+1.
Or it shows that MikeM also doesn't know how the angles should be expressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@Raceplate, you're right that Rossi have actually quoted the side edge angle in two ways - which is bad enough - but to make it worse their side edges are all actually 1(89) and not 2 (88 ) as they've stated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
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?
|
@spyderjon, ah, but one on the base plus one on the side is two yeah and when you're a cool dude that works in marketing being two is better than being one like the competition.
Hopefully, if @awdbugga is lucky, MikeM really didn't know what he was doing* and only ran a couple of passes with the tool set at 90 and just flatted the corner slightly without taking much material off.
@awdbugga how many times did he run the edge tool along the ski?
*which seems a to be the case if armed with an adjustable tool he couldn't work out what the existing edge angle was set to..
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
My question in all this is about accuracy of .5 or 1 degree or more etc
I dont buy into it but am prepared to try !
How flat are the bases ?
If the base is convex or concave in areas wont this screw up the whole side or base edge accuracy talk show .
Last edited by Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do. on Tue 7-11-17 12:24; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Good article. Didn't realize that the US quotes the edge angle differently to the EU. I wonder if the reason that Rossi answered the way they did was because they were trying to cover both ways of expressing it, not knowing where the enquirer is based?
I have my own view of why they ignored the base edge angle question, which is that the majority of ski servicing machines don't have any base edge setting adjustment. Therefore, better not to confuse the punter by having him walk into ski shops asking for something they can't do. I learnt this the hard way. 
I will add though, that the latest Wintersteiger machine CAN adjust the base angle. All lasers, digital displays and ceramic discs with adjustments in .25 degree increments. Amazing. My local shop (in LT) has one and it gives terrific results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tubaski wrote: |
@spyderjon, ah, but one on the base plus one on the side is two yeah and when you're a cool dude that works in marketing being two is better than being one like the competition.
Hopefully, if @awdbugga is lucky, MikeM really didn't know what he was doing* and only ran a couple of passes with the tool set at 90 and just flatted the corner slightly without taking much material off.
@awdbugga how many times did he run the edge tool along the ski?
*which seems a to be the case if armed with an adjustable tool he couldn't work out what the existing edge angle was set to.. |
He only ran the tool a couple of times. It didn’t seem to take much off to me, but then I’m no expert. He said his skis, which are ten years old are set to 89 and 1, but he believed that manufacturers these days set them to 90 and 0, so did mine accordingly. It was well intentioned and very kind of him to give up his time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tirol 164 wrote: |
How flat are the bases ?
If the base is convex or concave in areas wont this screw up the whole side or base edge accuracy talk show . |
In my experience if the base is concave they'll be all but unskiable
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
My point or question is you can be as precise as possible with brand new hand tools and workshop vices but what if bases are not 100% flat along the full lenght ?
The hand tools run off the base so if its wonky ie concave or convex then surely the edge angle your cutting must be out by the same amount ?
Because .5 or 1 degree is so small so precise the base would have to be very very flat too get this level of accuracy .
Would this be the case or not ?
Last edited by You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net. on Tue 7-11-17 17:47; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Awdbugga wrote: |
| It was well intentioned and very kind of him to give up his time. |
Quite, seems to me that people are being quite harsh on the fella. We should encourage people to be similarly helpful (I had the benefit of Scarpa showing me the basics). Although it might be advisable to have a quick google search to check angles on skis before sharpening.
I would caveat that I’m possibly not the best person to comment on the issue, I’ve pretty much learnt how to tune skis by reading Jon’s website and watching a lot of YouTube videos.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
Hi Guys,
Just picked up on this. To ease everyone's mind I've been servicing my own and friends skis for 30 odd years without problem. I don't profess to be as good as a professional but for recreational skiing the edge and waxing I've been doing on my skis has always been good enough to hold on ice at speed and glide well enough. It'll never be good enough for competition, but I don't compete  .
Right, 90 degrees was the angle given to @Awdbugger as that is what my edge tuner (Toko professional) was set at according to the scale written on it - the tool allows a setting from 85 to 90 degrees which is why I use that terminology and not 1,1, 2,1 etc... I set the tool at 90 degrees as I assumed (erroneously) that the "factory setting" on his skis was 90 degree and I didn't want to change anything as the edges (although a bit blunt in my opinion) were perfectly serviceable. I ran a couple of passes and hardly anything was taken off, so I'd assume that @Awdbugger won't see any difference, but I've advised him to try them out to see if he can notice any difference before I retune them to 89 and 1 degree respectively (as set by the scale written on the tools I use), which is also how I set my own.
@Awdbugger, who is a nice guy, was very grateful and the bottle of (very good) wine he gave me for helping out was gratefully received and I don't want him to think I've ruined his skis after reading all of the above 'cos if I have then I must have butchered my own and many other friends skis over the last 30 odd years (@Awdbugger - I haven't, honest )
Personally, I'd advise any recreational skier to do their own servicing, it's not that difficult and unless you want to gain an extra second or so against your mates is well worth the time. But, I would advise going to a professional if anyone is in any way unhappy with what they are doing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| SnoodlesMcFlude wrote: |
| Awdbugga wrote: |
| It was well intentioned and very kind of him to give up his time. |
Quite, seems to me that people are being quite harsh on the fella. |
I don't think anyone is questioning the intent or motivation of MikeM.
What we are questioning is the terminology being used by Awdbugga because it's not the norm and therefore makes his original question ambiguous at best and impossible to answer at worst.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@MikeM, Mike, I’m very grateful for your time and hospitality the other day. As you know, all this about base and edge angles is completely new and confusing to me. The only reason I opened the thread was when I tried to find out whether the angles should be a defacto 90 or whether Rossignol shipped them with a different setting. As it is, the info on their own web site seems to be wrong anyway, or at least confusing. Being a newbie I have no idea whether it would make any difference what they were set to, or whether it was down to personal preference and skiing style and whether as a beginner I would even notice. Hence me asking the question. I didn’t want to keep bothering you. What hasn’t helped is me not fully understanding the technical side of tuning and perhaps using the wrong terminology. (Newbie syndrome)
As to me taking them to Sail and Ski to be tweaked if they needed to be, that was purely because I didn’t want to impose on you any further; even though you have kindly offered to tweak them again, if needed. Plus, my friend who is going to Arabba in February with me needs to get custom insoles made there before we go and I was going to go with him.
The purpose of my visit to you was to see how to wax skis. The edge tuning was a real bonus. But they were not sharp, even I could feel that.
I don’t think for one moment you’ve ruined my skis. I was just unsure whether it would make a difference to a beginner like me that they were no longer at the factory setting and if so how it would manifest itself. To be be honest, if someone on here had said, “I’ve seen you ski and you could have them set to 86 and 3 or 90 and 2 and you wouldn’t see a difference, I’d have believed them, because I don’t know any better.
My sincere apologies if some of the comments on here have besmirched your name. You kindly gave up your time to help show a beginner how to look after his skis, and for that I am truly grateful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| Awdbugga wrote: |
| My sincere apologies if some of the comments on here have besmirched your name. You kindly gave up your time to help show a beginner how to look after his skis, and for that I am truly grateful. |
Good grief, no offence was taken at all so no apology necessary. I understand absolutely why you opened the question, the combined knowledge of the snowhead community is greater than one person (..something Star Trekky there ) and edge angles have far too much of the dark arts about them that any explanation from the experts that makes this clearer is helpful to all of us amateur service enthusiasts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
@MikeM, thanks for the clarification. Your way of expressing it is the US way in reverse, if I've understood correctly. The tool you've used is a Side Edge only tool working off the US way of expressing side edge angles (degrees from Horizontal rather than Vertical). Therefore, from your explanation above, you've put a 90 degree vertical edge on a ski that already has a 1 degree base edge, creating an obtuse 91 degree internal edge angle.
It may not a big deal but at least in theory it makes the edges blunter. If you go back and put the 89 degree edge on, it will match the original factory setting (as expressed in the EU) of 1,1, (89, 1, as you say) assuming that Rossi's email reply of an 88 degree side angle is wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| Raceplate wrote: |
@MikeM, thanks for the clarification. Your way of expressing it is the US way in reverse, if I've understood correctly. The tool you've used is a Side Edge only tool working off the US way of expressing side edge angles (degrees from Horizontal rather than Vertical). Therefore, from your explanation above, you've put a 90 degree vertical edge on a ski that already has a 1 degree base edge, creating an obtuse 91 degree internal edge angle.
It may not a big deal but at least in theory it makes the edges blunter. If you go back and put the 89 degree edge on, it will match the original factory setting (as expressed in the EU) of 1,1, (89, 1, as you say) assuming that Rossi's email reply of an 88 degree side angle is wrong. |
Exactly, but I didn't put too many passes on it as the edges were sound if a bit blunt and I didn't touch the base, so the angle as you point out is a 91 degree internal edge angle, rather than the 90 I was aiming for, as you say a bit on the obtuse side. @Awdbugger is a beginner (albeit an extremely passionate one, so I doubt he'll hold that description for long!), and it's unlikely he'll see a difference skiing at Chillfactor which won't have the bullet plate ice that really sharp edges are needed for. It's a 5 minute job to put the 89 degrees back on so I've advised him to try them out as they are and then I can retune them to 89 degrees and he can see if he can feel a difference. At the very least he'll be able to get a feel of what it's like to ski on dull edges compared to freshly sharpened before he goes on the SH bash to Arabba and finds out what skiing (sliding??) hard ice is like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
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?
|
Fairly good write up with diagrams IMO
I set all my families side edges to 3 to get the grip on hard packed which at the @rse ends of the season we ski is a regular occurrence. Plus the missus complained when I set it at 1. Base edge I never touch aside from a light angled swipe to take away any nasties.
I agree self servicing is a good thing. Not overly difficult and quite theraputic!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| Layne wrote: |
I set all my families side edges to 3 to get the grip on hard packed which at the @rse ends of the season we ski is a regular occurrence. |
3! (or 87 degrees in my terminology ) . Must be pretty damn icy to need that! Where do you ski?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I've set all my skis to 87 degrees for over 10 years. SLs, all rounders, even the 120mm powder skis. In soft snow it makes bugger all difference, they don't seem to wear any quicker (they do need more frequent light tuning though to keep that edge sharp), but get them on edge on really icy hard pack and the enhanced grip is very noticeable.
However, the downside is that they do engage and bite quickly so you need to be happy with that level of feedback. I've taken my fat Bent Chetlers down very steep icy blacks and still been able to turn although the tips and tails weren't half flapping about
Last edited by Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do. on Tue 7-11-17 17:26; edited 2 times in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Some of the racers I know use more acute edges than that, but unless you getting to a serious competition level where you are tuning your skis to specific conditions it is way over the top.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Scarpa wrote: |
I've set all my skis to 87 degrees for over 10 years. SLs, all rounders, even the 120mm powder skis. In soft snow it makes bugger all difference, they don't seem to wear any quicker, but get them on edge on really icy hardpack and the enhanced grip is very noticeable.
However, the downside is that they do engage and bite quickly so you need to be happy with that level of feedback. I've taken my fat Bent Chetlers down very steep icy blacks and still been able to turn although the tips and tails weren't half flapping about |
Very useful post. I've skied for (too) many years set at 89 and just got used to it. I think I'll tune them to 87 and see how I get on. Holding out on steep ice seems to have gotten more difficult and I'd put this down to the age of my skis (and me!) so maybe I can get a bit more control back by changing the angle. I'd always thought anything less than 89 would be too twitchy and don't know why I never considered changing it - servicing habit I suppose.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| MikeM wrote: |
| I'd always thought anything less than 89 would be too twitchy and don't know why I never considered changing it |
I've had no complaints from the wife or kids or indeed myself - since I changed 3-4 years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
I may just take them to a shop to do.
