Do new race skis need to be prepped opinions U14 level

[Swede]

You have to tune the ski. It might be okeyish from factory, but for a race course you need a sharp tune. What works for free skiing in a ”hard” pist is not the same.
Check what side angles they have according to previous advice (felt pen and stone) or go to a shop or simply decide and set with a file or machine; then work on the side. Base is normally 0.5–1. Just make sure it is smooth. Don’t touch it with anything coarser than a fine stone. I just go by hand, soft, to get it smooth. Personally I think there is a bit too much obsession with 87 or 88. Not that big of a difference as long as they are sharp. From top to tail.
U14 is a time when the number days on snow and sets of skis needed for multiple diciplines go up pretty seriously. In our club many start using SWIX machines, carrots etc. They do 20 minutes of work in an a few minutes.
But in a nutshell: yes, for racing, skis need to be tuned and sharp. For every practice. For every race. You need to use a file every now and then. Metal needs to come off.
For wax, normal allround will do. It is not that critical what type as long as bases are saturated , clean and shiny. Def not in tech. SG is starting in U14 so you might want to pay some more attention to glide there.

 

[Swede]

Added to above: you most propably will not need to grind bases on a new ski. They should be good from factory. Tune side bevel, polish base bevel (remove burr) and wax yes. Grind no.

 

[François Pugh]

I find a big difference between 0.5 and 1. If you are familiar with cars the following analogy will work for you. 1 base is like an old ford sedan with a big steering wheel that you have to turn about 30 degrees before the steering gear actually turns the front wheels. You can turn it back and forth about dead centre and nothing happens. 0.5 is like a sports car with steering where you only need to turn the wheel a degree or three before you are turning the car. 1 is way too forgiving. 0 is way too unforgiving (yes I did try that razor sharp tip to tail on an old pair of yard-sale Fischer "straight" SLs). My (infamous.) straight Kastle SGs came with 0.5 base and they were great; I tried them with 1.0 base and they were crappy, so I switched them back. My Fischer SCs came with 1 base 3 side, and I felt like I could read the newspaper while skiing down the run. I put a 0.5, 3 on as soon as I could. So long as I didn't really tip them they didn't care which way they were pointed. If you want something to ski sideways on, 1.0 is the ticket; if you want something that turns when you tell it to, get it tuned to 0.5. I do a lot of sideways skiing in moguls, so my moguls skis are tuned to 1.0 base.

0.5 base 3 side is slightly better at cutting into the snow than 1,3 (because the angle is more acute by 1/2 a degree), but not much. Ditto 0.5, 2 compared to 1,2, or 1,3 compared to 1,2. Being SHARP is the most important thing for grip.

 

[Swede]

Correct, base bevel does have much more influence on the "temperament" of the ski--how quickly it will engage. In tech, skis are on edge pretty much all the time. Free skiing can be another matter, there might want a little more wiggle room, YMMV. On a race ski for U14:s base bevel is usually a few degrees north of 0.5, say 0.7-0.8. Normally not something you will fiddle around with as you'd want to avoid base grinds on a race ski to preserve the precious thin race base material. It practically has no influence on "bite". Neither does if the side bevel is 88 or 87, it's sharpness from top to tail that matters.

 

[Rudi Riet]

I think one of the biggest problems across all levels of skiing is most junior racers free ski on their slalom skis and only train on their GS skis. However with less side cut, I believe it's imperative kids spend a ton of time free skiing on their GS skis whether they are 23, 27, or 30 meter (FIS) level race skis. If you watch Mikaela free skiing on her GS skis, she turns those FIS skis like she's riding a pair of fat boards in her home town of Vail.

The problem at a lot of smaller mountains/hills is that there isn't enough real estate to get quality miles on GS skis. This is especially the case when dealing with the longer turn radius skis on a small hill: it's nigh-on-impossible to get them up to speed where they'll perform outside of a closed racing/training trail due to the volume of other skiers on trails and the mandatory speed limits.

Sure, on a junior GS ski with a 17-23 meter turn radius and a more forgiving flex pattern it's often possible to get some quality turns, but going up in length there is a practical limit on these smaller hills. It's something I run into a lot where I coach and is a big reason why I encourage our U14 and older athletes to get some miles in on their GS skis at bigger mountains early in the season to build that muscle memory.

And with that, I'm gonna put the thread back on track:

Yes, get the skis tuned before you ski on them. There are some new shop machines that allow for variable base bevels (e.g. 0.7 tip and tail and 0.5 under foot) that may work well for some. At a U14 level a 0.7 is probably as aggressive as I'd get for places that get true ice/hardpack, 1.0 for those who ski on softer stuff - at least at the U14 level.

But these new skis need edge prep, they need the bases to be waxed and conditioned to impregnate wax into the base and prevent burned structure. These kids get a lot of miles on these skis so continuous care and feeding is needed to keep the skis fast (and safe, as you don't want a base to not glide or an edge to not grab predictably).

 

[nnowak]

No...... grabby. Not enough forgiveness when the ski engages. I find .5 makes not a bit of difference in regard to edge hold. Base bevel determines how quickly the edge engages, side edge angle is all about edge hold!

I don't know what it is like in your area, but around here, 0.5/3.0 are pretty much the de facto standard for slalom skis.

 

[Rudi Riet]

I don't know what it is like in your area, but around here, 0.5/3.0 are pretty much the de facto standard for slalom skis.

For higher-performing U16 and older athletes, sure. But for U14s it's not often advised unless the U14 is academy track or very strong for their age.

A 0.7° base bevel is aggressive for a younger athlete - not unheard of, but it's a lot for developing athletes who are undergoing the physical changes of puberty. They often have a tough enough time figuring out how to be comfortable with their changing bodies. Having skis that are super demanding can often hinder development at this age.

0.5° is even more aggressive and can lead to some very miserable experiences for young developing athletes. If they master (and possibly overpower) the 0.7° setup then sure, move to the 0.5°.

3° side is also aggressive for U14s in all but truly hard snow/ice. But it's not as much the root of the problem we're discussing here.

The basic gist: don't conflate what an adult can handle with what a developing 12-13 year old athlete can handle.

Just my $0.02 from my coaching experience on a multitude of surfaces.

 

[nnowak]

For higher-performing U16 and older athletes, sure. But for U14s it's not often advised unless the U14 is academy track or very strong for their age.

A 0.7° base bevel is aggressive for a younger athlete - not unheard of, but it's a lot for developing athletes who are undergoing the physical changes of puberty. They often have a tough enough time figuring out how to be comfortable with their changing bodies. Having skis that are super demanding can often hinder development at this age.

0.5° is even more aggressive and can lead to some very miserable experiences for young developing athletes. If they master (and possibly overpower) the 0.7° setup then sure, move to the 0.5°.

3° side is also aggressive for U14s in all but truly hard snow/ice. But it's not as much the root of the problem we're discussing here.

The basic gist: don't conflate what an adult can handle with what a developing 12-13 year old athlete can handle.

I wasn't. Around here, many U12 and a majority of U14 are on 0.5/3.0 for SL. GS is more varied with anything from 1.0/2.0 to 0.75/3.0.

 

[ScottB]

As a U14 race coach, I can attest that several of my racers noticed a huge improvement in their skis and their performance after getting tunes from SKIMD in Natick, MA. Now he does very precise work and is basically top of the heap. In my own experience, I bought a pair of used FIS GS skis that were "challenging" to ski when I got them. They were certainly very sharp for sure, and a bit grabby. They literally became pussy cats in comparison after going to SKIMD. I remember thinking "this is how a ski should feel". To me the biggest difference a grind and edge tune does is make the base bevel constant along the length of the ski. That has the effect of making edge engagement and feel very smooth and even. Having the base bevel vary even a little over the length of the ski is very noticeable, especially on icy slopes.

Another point to make is a base grind takes off very little base thickness. There is a video where someone did over 200 grind passes on a ski or snow board and didn't even come close to removing all the base material. The amount that is taken off will vary, but half a dozen grinds over the life of the ski is not a problem, the base is typically .060" thick and a grind should be taking off .001-.003", so that gives you 10 grinds to remove half the base. The biggest issue is how nicked up the edges are and how much material needs to come off to remove the nicks.

My 2 cents is find a tuner that does good work (not easy to do and a topic for another thread) and have him tune your daughters new skis. If you know how you can measure the skis to see how good/bad they are. Someone suggested having a shop do it if you are not able to, which is a good idea.

One of my racers Dads sharpened her skis not too long after a SKIMD tune and she made him take them back to SKIMD again to fix them. She could tell the difference right away and was ready to kill him for screwing up her skis. She was often on the podium and had skills, and a bit of a temper.

 

[robertc3]

For higher-performing U16 and older athletes, sure. But for U14s it's not often advised unless the U14 is academy track or very strong for their age.

A 0.7° base bevel is aggressive for a younger athlete - not unheard of, but it's a lot for developing athletes who are undergoing the physical changes of puberty. They often have a tough enough time figuring out how to be comfortable with their changing bodies. Having skis that are super demanding can often hinder development at this age.

0.5° is even more aggressive and can lead to some very miserable experiences for young developing athletes. If they master (and possibly overpower) the 0.7° setup then sure, move to the 0.5°.

3° side is also aggressive for U14s in all but truly hard snow/ice. But it's not as much the root of the problem we're discussing here.

The basic gist: don't conflate what an adult can handle with what a developing 12-13 year old athlete can handle.

Just my $0.02 from my coaching experience on a multitude of surfaces.

I wasn't. Around here, many U12 and a majority of U14 are on 0.5/3.0 for SL. GS is more varied with anything from 1.0/2.0 to 0.75/3.0.

Rudi is right on with this. There may be some U14s around my area that are on a .5, but I don't know who they are. U12s? I sure hope they aren't. Putting a U12 on a .5 base bevel seems like my son asking me to crank his DINs to 10. It is about the number, not what the number means.

 

[nnowak]

Rudi is right on with this. There may be some U14s around my area that are on a .5, but I don't know who they are. U12s? I sure hope they aren't. Putting a U12 on a .5 base bevel seems like my son asking me to crank his DINs to 10. It is about the number, not what the number means.

As I have said before in this discussion, edge angles are partially dependent on local conditions. What might be aggressive and demanding in one region might be just average in another region.

A few years ago we traveled to CO for a GS race. The local kids kept complaining about how icy the course was that weekend. For us, it was the nicest, softest snow we had skied on all year.

 

[Burton]

As I have said before in this discussion, edge angles are partially dependent on local conditions. What might be aggressive and demanding in one region might be just average in another region.

A few years ago we traveled to CO for a GS race. The local kids kept complaining about how icy the course was that weekend. For us, it was the nicest, softest snow we had skied on all year.

This x10. I grew up racing Rocky Mountain Div. where I learned to deal with huge ruts; I coach in New England where I learned to sharpen skis. General recommendations used for my program's athletes is .75 for U12s, .5 for 14s and up, SL and GS. All my tuning gear is set up for .5/3 and I never change it.

 

[Sherman89]

If you have the tools and knowhow to tune your daughters skis then you have the ability to check the skis to see what the ski has in the wrapper. check the bottom with a true bar for flatness, take a black marker and touch a few spots on the bottom edge and with your bottom file/stone tool set at .5 deg and using a stone touch the black marked edges and see if the marker comes off completely if so then you have .5 deg if the edge is still black then you have 1 deg. Recheck with a 1deg tool and stone. Do the same on the side edge using a 3 deg edge tool with a stone, if the black mark disappears then you have a 87deg edge. I f you do not have the confidence to check the skis yourself then find a reputable shop.

 

[JTurner]

I’ve recently had the opportunity to see with my own eyes what the base bevels really are along the whole length of fresh from the wrapper race stock skis. They need to be ground. And junior skis are probably worse, so it’s worth it.