Very helpful as always. So do you still recommend doing a paper test for a new pair of classic skis? Or is determining the kick zone as you've demonstrated here enough to start, and then refine after on-snow testing?
If only it worked like that in double camber. But it doesn't exactly--only sort of. Weight still matters. Go try it yourself for real skiing. Mathematically if weight matters for single camber, it still will matter for "double camber" which is a bit of an artificial construct anyway as is well known. But I take your general point which has relevance. I have found as others too, that no matter what is marked by a shop or a machine or a person for wax pockets has little to do with what I find in reality. Same as other aspects of skis that shops, elite technicians, or whoever has selected for me. I don't know until I know regarding skis--skate or classic,, ski pocket or whatever characteristic I value. I can find this out in a ski or two. Don't need someone to do it for me, nor do I find that letting someone else send me skis results in more predictability or a better ski (feel or speed) than what I determine for myself. I disagree totally with the c-clamp idea. Strange that very elite teams still use paper tests if they are not so good. I can see a wax pocket like you, but it is only a starting point, not some conclusion. It probably serves best to keep me from selecting that ski in the first place. In fact, even giving a shop my desirable characteristics, or getting some elaborate pressure distribution curve from the manufacturer, or whatever, or trying to have a manufacturer exactly reproduce a ski I loved that they "know" the characteristics, doesn't guarantee absolute success. It results in a good ski, but usually not in the same great ski.
Thank you for sharing!
Excellent. Explained so clearly that even a nerd wannabe like me can get it. Nice work.
Very helpful as always. So do you still recommend doing a paper test for a new pair of classic skis? Or is determining the kick zone as you've demonstrated here enough to start, and then refine after on-snow testing?
If only it worked like that in double camber. But it doesn't exactly--only sort of. Weight still matters. Go try it yourself for real skiing. Mathematically if weight matters for single camber, it still will matter for "double camber" which is a bit of an artificial construct anyway as is well known.
But I take your general point which has relevance.
I have found as others too, that no matter what is marked by a shop or a machine or a person for wax pockets has little to do with what I find in reality. Same as other aspects of skis that shops, elite technicians, or whoever has selected for me. I don't know until I know regarding skis--skate or classic,, ski pocket or whatever characteristic I value. I can find this out in a ski or two. Don't need someone to do it for me, nor do I find that letting someone else send me skis results in more predictability or a better ski (feel or speed) than what I determine for myself. I disagree totally with the c-clamp idea. Strange that very elite teams still use paper tests if they are not so good.
I can see a wax pocket like you, but it is only a starting point, not some conclusion. It probably serves best to keep me from selecting that ski in the first place.
In fact, even giving a shop my desirable characteristics, or getting some elaborate pressure distribution curve from the manufacturer, or whatever, or trying to have a manufacturer exactly reproduce a ski I loved that they "know" the characteristics, doesn't guarantee absolute success. It results in a good ski, but usually not in the same great ski.