 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@narbs, that’d be a major oversight imho. Surely a 19m radius ski is going to behave differently on edge to a 12m one??
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@narbs, yes, you could well be right (I hope) as the Carv team at the ski test knew what I was doing.
@Harry Flashman, I've been doing some of the training challenges, but at the end of the day the iq score on segments and the metrics associated with those scores tell me what I should be working on, and it all points to better edge angles and if that helps on fatter skis that's an immense benefit as I admire peeps I see carving a piste up on obvious fat skis!
Should also add that they're are now three of us chasing better IQ scores, though I don't do it as much as they do as I'm chasing other shite on cross-country skis 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
| kitenski wrote: |
| @narbs, that’d be a major oversight imho. Surely a 19m radius ski is going to behave differently on edge to a 12m one?? |
Absolutely, but if you ignore the Carv 'score' and delve into the measured metrics, it shouldn't affect it's usefulness.
If all you want is a high score, then yes, you'll do better with a dedicated piste ski but I think it's still useful to know eg balance, outside ski pressure.
I like mine and find them helpful to reinforce things from lessons, but you're right that they require a level of user understanding and input to get the most out of.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
@narbs, @Weathercam, based his tests on the overall score I think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| kitenski wrote: |
| @narbs, @Weathercam, based his tests on the overall score I think? |
You're right, and I agree that as a metric I wouldn't find it that useful other than purely to indicate what on-piste performance might be expected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Weathercam, yeah I get that, but also interested how having incorrect ski info in the app affects the scores, I'll ping them a message as myself and a mate looking into it...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure the ski info makes any difference to the score does it? Think it's just there for info purposes
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
@swskier, surely it must do? a 120mm ski is going to edge very differently to a 65mm ski? It would probably be a deal killer for me if it didn't take into account ski width.
Also this sounds very interesting
we've developed an easy way for you to take a ski video and overlay your Ski:IQ™ score - synced up for each turn. Now you can match the feeling of a great turn with your Ski:IQ™ and a visual of what your skiing looks like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Chaletbeauroc wrote: |
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
....and also Off Piste skis generally do not have a riser plate, which also makes getting high edge angles more difficult. |
Riser plates for racing skis are indeed designed to lift the boot clearer of the snow to allow greater edge angles, but with fat skis this is pretty much a non-issue, given that the ski is actually wider than the boot, so even if you could get as low as 90 degrees the boots still would not be touching the snow.
For reference, I just measured my boots, about 105mm at their widest, my fat skis have a waist of 122mm. |
I have some Scott "The skis" (92 waist) mounted flat; and some Dynastar SZ 12Ti, where the Bindings on the rail, lift the boot considerably higher - and when skiing, it certainly feels like I have more leverage and a smaller input has a bigger effect - even taking into account the different radius of the 2 different skis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
@Old Fartbag, that's what you'd expect from the geometry.
I can't recall whether race plates were originally introduced to add that bit of leverage or to mitigate "boot out".
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
I can't recall whether race plates were originally introduced to add that bit of leverage or to mitigate "boot out". |
IIRC. That was certainly one of the main reasons - but also a Race Plate can add substantially to the performance of a Ski, as evidenced by the SZ 12 vs SZ 14 which had the R22 race plate. When plates first started being put under standard skis, I seem to remember one of the benefits being that it allowed the skis to flex more naturally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
@Old Fartbag, so it's not what most recreational piste skiers would use on an open piste, basically they're designed for competitive racers who I'd imagine are quite nifty at carving?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@Weathercam, Risers under bindings first appeared quite a few years ago. As I understand it, Race Plates are a high performance version.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
My Dynastar Speed 963 SL skis are also available as the Speed Omega Master SL, the only difference being the race plate which presumably stiffens the ski underfoot somewhat? No need for me as I'm only a recreational skier!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
[quote="narbs"][quote="kitenski"]
| Weathercam wrote: |
Mmmm didn't change my ski data, in fact I only entered the make and model, not length, radius or width?
I might be wrong but I think the ski data is for reference only, I don't think it affects the actual scores given. |
My thoughts as well...
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| KenX wrote: |
| My Dynastar Speed 963 SL skis are also available as the Speed Omega Master SL, the only difference being the race plate which presumably stiffens the ski underfoot somewhat? No need for me as I'm only a recreational skier! |
Some great input here, especially from spyderjon and Raceplate: https://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=151251
Last edited by You need to Login to know who's really who. on Mon 6-03-23 20:44; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@Old Fartbag, interesting! So if I (ever!) grow out of my skis, I could retrofit the R22 plate and breathe new life into them 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
| Chaletbeauroc wrote: |
| Old Fartbag wrote: |
....and also Off Piste skis generally do not have a riser plate, which also makes getting high edge angles more difficult. |
For reference, I just measured my boots, about 105mm at their widest, my fat skis have a waist of 122mm. |
I have some Scott "The skis" (92 waist) mounted flat; and some Dynastar SZ 12Ti, where the Bindings on the rail, lift the boot considerably higher - and when skiing, it certainly feels like I have more leverage and a smaller input has a bigger effect - even taking into account the different radius of the 2 different skis. |
Well I wouldn't really describe a 92mm ski as "off piste"; all-mountain, maybe 
As for your comparison - two very different skis, two very different feelings. I had to look up the dynastars to see that they're 72mm, so a normal piste ski width, and of course it will make a difference to the way it feels, but is it really the extra width limiting the edge angle? I'm not convinced.
FWIW I've never felt that my 122s , and previous fat skis, in any way limit the amount of edge angle I can get. Their relatively lower rigidity and edge sharpness, compared with my (68mm) race skis, will make it much more difficult to hold that edge on hard pack or ice, of course, and I can see that, in theory, the extra height of the riser plate could make some difference, but how short would you need to be that a height gain of a centimetre or so would be significant?
Last edited by Then you can post your own questions or snow reports... on Mon 6-03-23 21:55; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Chaletbeauroc, I have never really understood the “added leverage” element of a 10mm plate … 
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| Chaletbeauroc wrote: |
Well I wouldn't really describe a 92mm ski as "off piste"; all-mountain, maybe
FWIW I've never felt that my 122s , and previous fat skis, in any way limit the amount of edge angle I can get. Their relatively lower rigidity and edge sharpness, compared with my race skis, will make the much more difficult to hold that edge on hard pack or ice, of course, and I can see that, in theory, the extra height of the riser plate could make some difference, but how short would you need to be that a height gain of a centimetre or so would be significant? |
My point - whether correct or not - is about skis that are mounted flat vs skis where the binding is raised up, which are almost exclusively Piste skis.
I also think my point, is that it is not so much that edge angle is limited - but higher edge angles can be achieved more easily, due to the extra height. Now, it is more than possible that this is in my head - and only skiing the same ski, on the same run, on the same day, with and without the extra height, would I know for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| under a new name wrote: |
| @Chaletbeauroc, I have never really understood the “added leverage” element of a 10mm plate … |
From this excellent blog on performance skiing: https://fedewenzelski.com/advanced-skiing-10-key-tips-to-help-you-achieve-higher-edge-angles/
9) Surface and equipment
Binding riser plates (AKA “lifters“) help a lot in developing high edge angles because they create more leverage. These lifters are pieces of material between skis and bindings that elevate boots farther off the skis and snow. They also allow the skier to hold a steeper edge angle without encountering “boot out“. Boot out occurs when the side of the boot hits the snow, causing the ski to get knocked off edge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
@Old Fartbag, sure, fine, but yet another commentator without basic physics or engineering knowledge.
Avoiding boot-out is one thing and an important thing on race skis.
But adding “leverage”? I don’t see how (in any meaningful sense)
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
| under a new name wrote: |
@Old Fartbag, sure, fine, but yet another commentator without basic physics or engineering knowledge.
Avoiding boot-out is one thing and an important thing on race skis.
But adding “leverage”? I don’t see how (in any meaningful sense) |
S'OK, I'm not really arguing - but giving an opinion on what I feel when skiing. I then went to find something to back up my assertion and found it in that blog (which I have posted before and find very well explained and informative).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Old Fartbag, yeah but it’s an explanation I’ve heard for years without any mechanics to back it up.
Hey ho! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Whether you consider this blog to be "excellent" or not is moot, but you should certainly be asking whether its author really knows what they're talking about.
Fairly simple (I remember it from 'O' level physics) mechanics defines that the "leverage" is a function of the force (e.g. weight of skier) and the distance (perpendicular to the direction of the force, i.e. in this case in the plane of the ski) from a pivot point that it's being applied. That's it.
The height of the skier will make some small difference, i.e. with sufficient angulation the entire weight could be slightly further away from the pivot point, but one centimetre more or less of height will not be significant. Ironically a wider ski will actually increase this leverage by a much more significant amount, given that the pivot point, i.e. the edge of the ski in contact with the snow, is significantly further away from the point of action of the weight through the middle of the ski, but you don't hear anyone suggesting that this greater leverage from wider skis helps to develop higher edge angles.
Most times I've heard people talk about this leverage they think it's something directly to do with the distance between the ski and the foot, which makes no sense whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
@Chaletbeauroc, Like I previously made clear, this is not a hill I'm prepared to die on....but a feeling I have. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
@Old Fartbag, TBF It's not really you that's wrong, because this idea has been around for some time and I've seen it touted in many different places. Unfortunately some supposed authoritative sources are happy to simply repeat it without ever asking themselves how the basic mechanics could make it so.
Anyway, yes, riser plates are important if you're trying to achieve higher edge angles, fundamentally because of the risk of the boot touching the snow. The wider the ski, the less this is an issue, to the point like in my example where it's not even possible. But racers, always using skis much narrower than their boots, have been using them for decades for this reason.
Oh, and I should say that I'd be very happy to be corrected - if anyone can explain how the mechanics are not as I think they are, then please somebody feel free
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
| Chaletbeauroc wrote: |
@Old Fartbag, TBF It's not really you that's wrong, because this idea has been around for some time and I've seen it touted in many different places. Unfortunately some supposed authoritative sources are happy to simply repeat it without ever asking themselves how the basic mechanics could make it so.
Anyway, yes, riser plates are important if you're trying to achieve higher edge angles, fundamentally because of the risk of the boot touching the snow. The wider the ski, the less this is an issue, to the point like in my example where it's not even possible. But racers, always using skis much narrower than their boots, have been using them for decades for this reason.
Oh, and I should say that I'd be very happy to be corrected - if anyone can explain how the mechanics are not as I think they are, then please somebody feel free |
I do put a lot of stock in what you say - as I mostly agree with you.
As for the author of the blog, this is what he says:
About Me
I am a Medical Doctor (PhD) & Professional Ski Instructor, with more than 15 years of experience. I’m passionate about top-level skiing and how to teach it.
I speak 4 languages: English, Spanish, Italian and Portuguese.
I live in El Bolsón, Patagonia Argentina, but I travel around the world often, skiing and training/teaching!
|
|
|
|
|
|
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?
|
@Chaletbeauroc, I’d love to see that explanation too!
One other thing, on wide skis, they introduce a castor effect, which is part of why they’re tougher on knees, in that, at normalish edge angles and firmish snow, edging is raising against body weight … plus leveraging against centrifugal force.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
The blog man doesn't explain anything, he states something which seems incorrect. Can anyone explain how you think that works?
| uann wrote: |
| castor effect |
What's that - can you explain?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
@phil_w, I kinda know what it is for wheeled vehicles, but cannot for the life of me think what it might mean for skiing.
FWIW I have dodgy knees - one in particular, which has had several surgeries in the past and needs some more now. My current quiver goes from 68mm to 122mm and I can honestly say that I've never felt that any of them are better or worse for the knees than any other. Yes, in theory the greater moment (==leverage/torque) generated by the wider ski will put more of the force on one side of the leg than the other, so it makes sense that it might put more stress on one side of the knee than the other, but I've never been able to notice it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
@phil_w, it's as you edge the ski, the width means that you're lifting (the centre line of the boot/ski) against your body weight (not just vs the centrifugal force). Wider the ski the greater effect.
@Chaletbeauroc, I don't notice it now, but I did when I first moved from 66mm slalom skis to 100mm things.
@phil_w, you're a snowboarder, you've always had it, especially with a race set up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ps it should be “caster” - I may (although I don’t think so) have coined it myself, being analogous to the designed self steering of supermarket trolleys - but I think I came across it in a discussion of skis (significantly) wider than boot width, way back when that was a wondrous innovation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
Response overnight from Carv on different skis affecting metrics:
Thank you for your patience while I was waiting to hear back from the team. Currently, this doesn't have an impact on technique analysis (metrics) but we're collecting it to integrate it in the future.
| Quote: |
Thank you for your patience while I was waiting to hear back from the team. Currently, this doesn't have an impact on technique analysis (metrics) but we're collecting it to integrate it in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just in from Carv.
We're going off-piste!
We've heard your feedback loud and clear. Carv has revolutionized ski coaching for groomers, but you want to improve off-piste too.
Today we're taking our first step off the trail with the launch of Terrain Labelling. After you ski, simply tag the terrain - like moguls or powder - and the snow conditions - like choppy or icy.
Each label teaches our algorithm how your skiing changes in response to different terrains; that'll help us develop exciting new features such as terrain detection and terrain-specific coaching!
Be interesting to see what comes out of that, though not too sure I can be arsed with using it off-piste?
But as others, including on here, there is a demand for it.
I've not been using it too much recently as snow-pack has not been ideal but yesterday was some great carving conditions, though I actually ended up skiing for skiing's sake as opposed to skiing with Carv, though there was one line where everything felt (again) really good and, again ended up with not to bad metrics.
This wasn't that point as I came close to sliding out, again
Basically, my right leg should be straighter, thus applying more pressure so as not to spin out, using an old windsurfing term
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
