But whether that mass is distributed over 24" or 60" makes a difference.
-
For more information on how to avoid pop-up ads and still support SkiTalk click HERE.
Moving the mount point back and forth.
it essentially makes the ski shorter, like skiing gates with 165 skis vs a 195 ski even if the TR was designed to be the same.
No it doesn't, there's one vector only.
Real life NEVER has one vector. Physics texts simplify for the purpose of illustration.
In the example of the 1 foot pole vs the 8' pole weight would be the variable of how much force you used. Think about it like this, a tall skier who weighs 200# will move their center of mass differently when extended than a short skier who weighs 200#.
I'll stop here. This is not worth an argument, but I would recommend a few physics textbooks if you really want to understand.
Binding placement is so complicated. It needs to match the radius of the ski, balance the length in front vs in back, optimize the flex of the ski, accommodate your boot and just feel good.
Really, the only thing that really matters is how it feels. So go move your bindings around until it feels right for you. Sometimes (often?) it takes a huge movement. Sometimes it's not the binding placement at all - you just need a different ski. Hopefully it's sweet right on the factory settings.
Eric
Really, the only thing that really matters is how it feels. So go move your bindings around until it feels right for you. Sometimes (often?) it takes a huge movement. Sometimes it's not the binding placement at all - you just need a different ski. Hopefully it's sweet right on the factory settings.
Eric
I get that the mass of the skier bends the ski, but I understand that it goes deeper than that.
Example @ScotsSkier is a small guy, but I have no doubt that he can bend a ski better than some bigger guys I know who don't have his skill set.
At what point do we look at physiology?
@Mendieta is considering changing the mount point on his skis, but he is still in his beginner boots that he got a few years ago, while his skis have graduated.
It could (emphasis on could) be possible that his boots are too soft for the updated skis.
This is the mindset that I have had for sometime after taking a lesson with @Bob Barnes.
Its the difference between thinking about flexing your ankles and flexing into the front of the boot.
When I work with someone in a ski package I ask a lot of questions regarding other activities they do. Then I match the ski and boot combo. It doesn't work well to have someone in a marshmallow of a boot on a stiffer ski, or vice versa.
You are right, the skiers ability to maintain a carved turn will influence how much her can bend the ski, and his ability to attain high edge angles and high speed.
It's creating the centrifugal forces.
Thread Starter
TS
Exactly, not quite beginner boots, though: Tecnica Mach 110. I think they were great for the lower intermediate I was at the time. But they seem behind my skis and where I am ...two full seasons later. Also, we skied together recently and you did have the feeling that it was time for a change.
BTW, many thanks for all the contributions to this thread, very useful, and I think my general question was answered well and clearly in the first few posts.
As for the bending question: I agree with you. Sometimes you see young racers bending the heck out of very stiff skis, and they are light as a feather, but their edging angles are very high, their speed is really high, and I think it's reasonable since linear momentum is proportional to both mass and speed.
It's true that the weight of the skier bends the ski. It is also true that the skis can be leveraged to bend. Warren W actually describes both of those... but what should happen? Good question... if you find that you have to leverage the boot to bend the ski, you're likely unweighting the tails too much and also you're very likely to jam the bottom of the turn pretty hard, as you're "stuck" on the front of the boot! And yes, taller skiers would find it easier to leverage the ski into bending!
It is more preferable, in my mind, to let the centrifugal force bend the ski for you (or centripetal, whatever).
Also, interestingly, I was just looking at this discussion on bending the skis with weight or angles on Facebook, started by the mischievous Tom Gellie
and, as I couldn't sleep well - having replaced scotch with tequila (yeah, I know)-, I did the math/physics.
It turns out that
1) the mass of the skier is not relevant (as long as you have enough to balance on the ski on edge, I guess)
2) at 60 degrees edge angle, the centrifugal force is 3x and the radius is x/3 compared to 30 degrees edge angle
3) at 60 degrees edge angle and 40 kmh linear speed, the radius is 7m and at 30 degrees, it is 22m, which instinctively sounds about right...
F = m S^2 / r
F = G * tan(e)
G = m * g
F = m g tan (e)
r = S^2 / g tan(e))
or thereabouts - it is likely that the tequila had an impact on my math... and I got my sins or cousins wrong...
p.s. of course this looks at an idealized turn, but in reality, the shape of the ski (SL vs GS) dictates the ski bend thus the centripetal force, which emphasizes the dangers of relying on tequila... when dealing with these quarks... err, quirks...
So... what all this quantum physics shows is that the way to bend the ski is to put it on edge and balance on it!
It is more preferable, in my mind, to let the centrifugal force bend the ski for you (or centripetal, whatever).
Also, interestingly, I was just looking at this discussion on bending the skis with weight or angles on Facebook, started by the mischievous Tom Gellie
and, as I couldn't sleep well - having replaced scotch with tequila (yeah, I know)-, I did the math/physics.It turns out that
1) the mass of the skier is not relevant (as long as you have enough to balance on the ski on edge, I guess)
2) at 60 degrees edge angle, the centrifugal force is 3x and the radius is x/3 compared to 30 degrees edge angle
3) at 60 degrees edge angle and 40 kmh linear speed, the radius is 7m and at 30 degrees, it is 22m, which instinctively sounds about right...
F = m S^2 / r
F = G * tan(e)
G = m * g
F = m g tan (e)
r = S^2 / g tan(e))
or thereabouts - it is likely that the tequila had an impact on my math... and I got my sins or cousins wrong...
p.s. of course this looks at an idealized turn, but in reality, the shape of the ski (SL vs GS) dictates the ski bend thus the centripetal force, which emphasizes the dangers of relying on tequila... when dealing with these quarks... err, quirks...
So... what all this quantum physics shows is that the way to bend the ski is to put it on edge and balance on it!
Last edited:
It's true that the weight of the skier bends the ski. It is also true that the skis can be leveraged to bend. Warren W actually describes both of those... but what should happen? Good question... if you find that you have to leverage the boot to bend the ski, you're likely unweighting the tails too much and also you're very likely to jam the bottom of the turn pretty hard, as you're "stuck" on the front of the boot! And yes, taller skiers would find it easier to leverage the ski into bending!
It is more preferable, in my mind, to let the centrifugal force bend the ski for you (or centripetal, whatever).
Also, interestingly, I was just looking at this discussion on bending the skis with weight or angles on Facebook, started by the mischievous Tom Gellie
It turns out that
1) the mass of the skier is not relevant (as long as you have enough to balance on the ski on edge, I guess)
2) at 60 degrees edge angle, the centrifugal force is 3x and the radius is x/3 compared to 30 degrees edge angle
3) at 60 degrees edge angle and 40 kmh linear speed, the radius is 7m and at 30 degrees, it is 22m, which instinctively sounds about right...
F = m S^2 / r
F = G * tan(e)
G = m * g
F = m g tan (e)
r = S^2 / g tan(e))
or thereabouts - it is likely that the tequila had an impact on my math... and I got my sins or cousins wrong...
p.s. of course this looks at an idealized turn, but in reality, the shape of the ski (SL vs GS) dictates the ski bend thus the centripetal force, which emphasizes the dangers of relying on tequila... when dealing with these quarks... err, quirks...
So... what all this quantum physics shows is that the way to bend the ski is to put it on edge and balance on it!
Pleased to see someone here has a clue. A ski bends when it’s put on edge and force generated sufficient to decamber it (which is not very much). ScotsSkier, who apparently isn’t very big, can bend a ski a lot because he has the skill to create high edge angles. The degree to which a ski bends is related to the edge angle achieved. This is basic stuff!
