New ski idea

ajbski

ajbski

Active member
The fish tail thread and the bdog edge or edgeless thread has got me thinking...

why not make skis that only have 1 edge per ski, so if you are riding groomers you put the edges on the inside, but then you’re sliding rails, you put the edge on the outside.

should I build them? Why or why not
 
I Don't think that's a good idea for groomers. You would have to place almost all your weight on your outside ski and you really should be a little more balanced over your skis.
 
From what I understand, you actually do want your weight over the outside ski.

watch jens carving video on stomp it, if you don’t wanna take my word for it

14377970:CabbyArrant said:
I Don't think that's a good idea for groomers. You would have to place almost all your weight on your outside ski and you really should be a little more balanced over your skis.
Click to expand...
 
Carving requires heavy inside, downhill ski edge pressure, however not solely... there are times to engage outside uphill edge if even briefly...

I'm sure your idea would WORK, but would it SELL?
 
Idk, armada is selling completely edgeless skis.

I just want to know if performance on rails really increases without edges.

I feel like like most edge work on rails is also done with the inside edge.

14378062:Abomber22 said:
Carving requires heavy inside, downhill ski edge pressure, however not solely... there are times to engage outside uphill edge if even briefly...

I'm sure your idea would WORK, but would it SELL?
Click to expand...
 
I could, but I don’t think I will since they will be predominantly rail skis.

I don’t want to fuck around rotating the heel piece back each time I take off the skis while hiking.

14378094:Jems said:
always make sure to mount pivots instead of squires
Click to expand...
 
14377975:ajbski said:
From what I understand, you actually do want your weight over the outside ski.

watch jens carving video on stomp it, if you don’t wanna take my word for it
Click to expand...

You should be anglelating (for sure spelled wrong) away from your outside ski, pressure engaged on both skis but biased towards the down hill ski, so the inside ski to initiate the turn and outside ski once you cross the apex of your turn. The way you give advice makes me think you have a severe lack of upper and lower body seperation.
 
Separation causes angulation.

you can’t duck your hips down into the turn if your upper body isn’t facing outward/at the fall line.

during my csia level 3 tests, the course conductor basically told us to ski on one foot the entire way through turn.

really the only time you might have even pressure (or no pressure) is in between turns.

but that’s going further away from the topic...

14378121:r00kie said:
You should be anglelating (for sure spelled wrong) away from your outside ski, pressure engaged on both skis but biased towards the down hill ski, so the inside ski to initiate the turn and outside ski once you cross the apex of your turn. The way you give advice makes me think you have a severe lack of upper and lower body seperation.
Click to expand...
 
14378126:ajbski said:
Separation causes angulation.

you can’t duck your hips down into the turn if your upper body isn’t facing outward/at the fall line.

during my csia level 3 tests, the course conductor basically told us to ski on one foot the entire way through turn.

really the only time you might have even pressure (or no pressure) is in between turns.

but that’s going further away from the topic...
Click to expand...

Oh boy, pulling the certified instructor card out. To bad my cert expired so I can't do the same.
 
Downhill inside edge is where you want your weight when carving. Have edgeless on the inside for park and when you go outside of the park, switch your skis around.

Was actually thinking about a ski with no inside edges underfoot on one side of each ski but this seems way easier to manufacture. Would like to see a company do this.
 
Not proud of my cert as most ski instructors are. Kind of ruined the fun in skiing for me in a lot of ways.

but I do see why you might of said what you did. Likely applicable to many people here.

14378130:r00kie said:
Oh boy, pulling the certified instructor card out. To bad my cert expired so I can't do the same.
Click to expand...
 
14377970:CabbyArrant said:
I Don't think that's a good idea for groomers. You would have to place almost all your weight on your outside ski and you really should be a little more balanced over your skis.
Click to expand...

It’s actually a great idea and you just have absolutely no idea what you’re saying. This is because to shred a groomer you have to but all you weight on the down hill ski (or the inside edge) this movement is called pedaling.
 
I’ve always had the idea of a ski with no edge under the foot and tips and tails but the camber above the toe and behind the heel with edge
 
14378131:jompcock said:
Downhill inside edge is where you want your weight when carving. Have edgeless on the inside for park and when you go outside of the park, switch your skis around.

Was actually thinking about a ski with no inside edges underfoot on one side of each ski but this seems way easier to manufacture. Would like to see a company do this.
Click to expand...

But when your on rails your inside edge take majority pressure so it wouldn't have any benefits to switch them around
 
14378302:switchlip2 said:
I’ve always had the idea of a ski with no edge under the foot and tips and tails but the camber above the toe and behind the heel with edge
Click to expand...

It works nice. Enough edge to manage ice and control pretzels a little better. But greasy rails underfoot. Only sucks when tubes are like bone dry and sticky cause it feels like your skis are made out of rubber. Other than that you ain’t catching on shit.
 
14378419:weastcoat said:
It works nice. Enough edge to manage ice and control pretzels a little better. But greasy rails underfoot. Only sucks when tubes are like bone dry and sticky cause it feels like your skis are made out of rubber. Other than that you ain’t catching on shit.
Click to expand...

Vishnu underfoot Edgeless one day imma call it

**This post was edited on Jan 12th 2022 at 1:08:22pm
 
You have your edges on the inside when you’re on groomers; then on the outside when sliding rails.

did you even read anything in this thread?

14378422:FruitBootPro said:
This is a pretty awful idea, not sure what the objective of this design even is
Click to expand...
 
I’m gonna ignore all the talk about proper positioning but one problem is matching the edge to the base and sidewall. It would be difficult to make the base flat/line up the construction
 
14378414:ajbski said:
do edgeless skis actually slide rails better tho?
Click to expand...

a bit more slow but way more consistant. pvc tubes are kinda whack tho, feels like rubber as mentioned above.
 
i think you could mill out the step in the edge that goes outside of the base.

then you could let the base material extend out past the edge/sidewall. trim it away when cleaning up the flash of the ski.

i think this would stop the tear out. but a lot more work than just putting no edge on one side of the ski.
 
14378451:BradFiAusNzCoCa said:
I’m gonna ignore all the talk about proper positioning but one problem is matching the edge to the base and sidewall. It would be difficult to make the base flat/line up the construction
Click to expand...

i mean regardless of how much pressure you squeeze the ski with in the press, bases never come out perfectly flat.

every manufacturer depends on grinding off around 0.25-0.5mm of the edge and base. which is whack if you consider bases start off at around 1.5mm.
 
A lot don’t even make sure there bases are flat. And I’m pretty sure average base height is 1.2-1.3mm so not even 1.5mm. But with edge and sidewall and all that - you could be looking at a pretty big difference between the two edge/sides.

Let’s rope in [tag=144811]@hot.pocket[/tag] [tag=3025]@iggyskier[/tag] and [tag=249118]@FaunaSkis[/tag] bedause now I’m curious how it would look build-wise and if I’m just totally off base

14378471:ajbski said:
i mean regardless of how much pressure you squeeze the ski with in the press, bases never come out perfectly flat.

every manufacturer depends on grinding off around 0.25-0.5mm of the edge and base. which is whack if you consider bases start off at around 1.5mm.
Click to expand...
 
[tag=267217]@GilsonSkis[/tag] does some tricky stuff with their edges on their boards. maybe they wanna chime in?

-adam
 
14378489:BradFiAusNzCoCa said:
A lot don’t even make sure there bases are flat. And I’m pretty sure average base height is 1.2-1.3mm so not even 1.5mm. But with edge and sidewall and all that - you could be looking at a pretty big difference between the two edge/sides.

Let’s rope in [tag=144811]@hot.pocket[/tag] [tag=3025]@iggyskier[/tag] and [tag=249118]@FaunaSkis[/tag] bedause now I’m curious how it would look build-wise and if I’m just totally off base
Click to expand...

Standard base thickness is 1.2mm (which is wack, so we use 1.8mm)

you definitely lose some of the stated edge and base thickness in factory finishing/flattening of the skis and lose a bunch if you get an overzealous tech with a new belt grinding your skis for a service.

to get flatter bases, pretty much everyone rabbets the core to seat the teeth and step of the edge.

to create an edge less portion underfoot you would be best not ending the edge and starting it again, this way you would create a point for it to catch and just pull out. you would be better curving the edge to set it back from the side of the ski, kind of like the inset edge you got on the atomic triplet but continuous.

this would also allow for replacing a part of the base underfoot by epoxying it in. Just initial thoughts, would definitely take some refining.
 
14378507:FaunaSkis said:
Standard base thickness is 1.2mm (which is wack, so we use 1.8mm)

you definitely lose some of the stated edge and base thickness in factory finishing/flattening of the skis and lose a bunch if you get an overzealous tech with a new belt grinding your skis for a service.

to get flatter bases, pretty much everyone rabbets the core to seat the teeth and step of the edge.

to create an edge less portion underfoot you would be best not ending the edge and starting it again, this way you would create a point for it to catch and just pull out. you would be better curving the edge to set it back from the side of the ski, kind of like the inset edge you got on the atomic triplet but continuous.

this would also allow for replacing a part of the base underfoot by epoxying it in. Just initial thoughts, would definitely take some refining.
Click to expand...

instead of just underfoot edgeless, what if the ski had only an edge on one side?

i think you could just skip the rabbet on the side without the edge, and your bases should come out pretty flat, no?
 
It's not that it's not impossible. It's that RIP your production time and cost. Not to mention the people that yap about this the most are the ones most likely to not want to pay for that extra cost. So the 5 people that WANT this would then turn around and cry that it costs too much and go back to whatever price point ski they default to.

No one is coming up with any new ideas in this regard that have not been tried and rejected already.
 
14378512:Session said:
It's not that it's not impossible. It's that RIP your production time and cost. Not to mention the people that yap about this the most are the ones most likely to not want to pay for that extra cost. So the 5 people that WANT this would then turn around and cry that it costs too much and go back to whatever price point ski they default to.

No one is coming up with any new ideas in this regard that have not been tried and rejected already.
Click to expand...

are you talking about no edge underfoot? thats not the idea.

if anything taking out the edge on one side of the completely could reduce production costs. fitting the edge to base is one of the more time consuming/skilled processes.

it would make trimming away the flash harder.
 
14378489:BradFiAusNzCoCa said:
A lot don’t even make sure there bases are flat. And I’m pretty sure average base height is 1.2-1.3mm so not even 1.5mm. But with edge and sidewall and all that - you could be looking at a pretty big difference between the two edge/sides.

Let’s rope in [tag=144811]@hot.pocket[/tag] [tag=3025]@iggyskier[/tag] and [tag=249118]@FaunaSkis[/tag] bedause now I’m curious how it would look build-wise and if I’m just totally off base
Click to expand...

It's tough to produce a ski with no edge underfoot that stays together for an extended period of time with rail abuse. While steel edges crack and break, the plastic warps when there is no edge, which allows water inside the ski. Heat from sliding metal also semi-perma warps the plastic base so it doesn't sit flat after a while. We did an edgeless underfoot Frankenski years ago as a prototype and kept it off the production line as we weren't satisfied with how it held up over time.

Would love to see how the edgeless BDog holds up, and if it does hold up well, props to Armada.

We use 1.5mm base / 2.2mm edge combo. We obviously grind out skis post layup, but with refines to our production techniques we typically don't take off too much base / edge material. Some use thicker 1.8mm base / 2.5mm edge combo (ON3P and I think Fauna mentioned similarly above) and some use thinner 1.3mm base / 2.0mm edge combo (won't list any as I'm not 100% positive).

We feel the 1.5 / 2.2 combo is the best for weight / durability trade-off. If companies don't advertise what edge thickness they use, or use buzzwords as thicker / thickest edge, they are usually using 2.2mm edge.
 
Some interesting ideas for sure, are we still talking about the design that OP posted. Or the modified hybrid idea posted in the thread.

14378491:ajbski said:
[tag=267217]@GilsonSkis[/tag] does some tricky stuff with their edges on their boards. maybe they wanna chime in?

-adam
Click to expand...
 
14378527:hot.pocket said:
While steel edges crack and break, the plastic warps when there is no edge, which allows water inside the ski. Heat from sliding metal also semi-perma warps the plastic base so it doesn't sit flat after a while. We did an edgeless underfoot Frankenski years ago as a prototype and kept it off the production line as we weren't satisfied with how it held up over time.

Would love to see how the edgeless BDog holds up, and if it does hold up well, props to Armada.
Click to expand...

I think that covers it.

/thread
 
14378418:Piss_Boy said:
But when your on rails your inside edge take majority pressure so it wouldn't have any benefits to switch them around
Click to expand...

Yes so when skiing rails/park, have no edges as inside edges; that way you do not damage the edge causing it to fall out, creating a void for water to seep in. When it's time to ski the rest of the mountain you can switch the skis around so you have inside edges again.
 
14378910:Piss_Boy said:
Wouldn't it be more beneficial to have outside edges skiing all mountain though?
Click to expand...

no piss boy sorry.

not if you know how to ski properly, and i dont mean park.

thats a wierd name to choose btw
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top