8 degree base bevel

[bbinder]

Well, I just dropped off a pair of skis at SkiMD. Mike DeSantis said that the base bevel was 8 degrees, and he said that there was no way that I could have skied them and made any turns on hardpack. Funny thing: I never noticed any problem.

Either 1) he is wrong (very unlikely); 2) I am going to ski so much better when I get them back (also very unlikely); or 3) I cannot judge the tune of a ski to save my life (the most likely answer). Just think how much I will save on ski tunes in the future: since I cannot tell the difference if a ski is tuned correctly, then there is no point in worrying about how my edges are sharpened!

 

[Sibhusky]

Or you might just be very good at getting your skis way out to the side to engage that edge. I'm sure you'll be a lot happier when you get them back, but start on a bunny slope to get used to them first. Especially if it's hardpack.

 

[Atomicman]

Or you might just be very good at getting your skis way out to the side to engage that edge. I'm sure you'll be a lot happier when you get them back, but start on a bunny slope to get used to them first. Especially if it's hardpack.

Sib..........you're too kind! Maybe not ever carving at all!

 

[KingGrump]

You are ahead of the curve. That is one of those new skis with the trendy lateral rocker. Real surfy feel.
Either that or you have been skiing Alta way too much.

Answers to your questions.
(01) No.
(02) Yes, if you don't die first like @Sibhusky inferred.
(03)

Word of advice: DO NOT go back to the last tuner.
Good luck on the new tune.

 

[KevinF]

I happened to be in the shop dropping off skis at the same time as @bbinder was... I did see Mike take a true bar to binder's skis and the gap was... a lot.

I asked Mike what base bevel he was putting on my Stockli's and Mike said he uses 0.5 degrees now.

He used to do 0.7 degrees, and I asked for that, but he said his machine can't differentiate between the two (i.e., margin of error). Now that I've run the math, the difference between the 0.5 and 0.7 base bevel is less than 0.01mm.

I still might have to take a diamond stone to the base to soften it up a bit, but I'll give it a try.

Yeah... Eight degrees to 0.5? You'll notice a change.

 

[Steve]

My Stöckli SCs just came from him. 3 days on them and I’m loving the base bevel. And what a gorgeous structure!

 

[KevinF]

My Stöckli SCs just came from him. 3 days on them and I’m loving the base bevel. And what a gorgeous structure!

0.5 base is fun on a groomer... in a bump run? Different story.

 

[Josh Matta]

.5 is fine on a bump run.....as long as there is no hanging burr

 

[KevinF]

.5 is fine on a bump run.....as long as there is no hanging burr

I would think the presence of a hanging burr would make life a living hell in a bump run regardless of the underlying bevel.

The suitability of a 0.5 would also be dependent on the pilot’s skill... I humbly submit you’re somewhat more skilled at this than I am.

 

[LiquidFeet]

Me too.

Mike told me my race skis, which felt VERY SHARP last season, had a 2.5 base bevel on them. Really??? I don't doubt him, but I had been figuring they had 0.5 or 0.7. I bought them used, so what did I know. But but, how could they feel so sharp? I guess it's the flex pattern of the ski that I was mistaking for base bevel/side bevel sharpness. They are Atomic FIS SLs.

So yes he put 0.5 on them and 3 on the side, and I think he said this is what he puts on all skis now. I was fine with that, but I worried that going from 2.5 base to 0.5 base would be difficult to handle.

Nope. Love 'em the same as before. Great hold, far superior to everything else I ski (on hard-snow groomers). The quickness of the tipping may indeed be faster, but my body can't tell the difference from last year's slower response. I'm too busy getting my ski legs back, and talking myself into feeling OK with the speed. Especially that last.

My take-away? Get all my groomer ski bases set at 0.5.

 

[bbinder]

Well, I hope I will still be able to ski bumps...

 

[LiquidFeet]

Well, I hope I will still be able to ski bumps...

I'm figuring if my second pair of skis he put that 0.5 on are too grippy for bumps, I'll multi-lap pivot slips with them on the front five over at Cannon. Changing that base bevel shouldn't take too long on the mid-January ice.

 

[Atomicman]

Me too.

Mike told me my race skis, which felt VERY SHARP last season, had a 2.5 base bevel on them. Really??? I don't doubt him, but I had been figuring they had 0.5 or 0.7. I bought them used, so what did I know. But but, how could they feel so sharp? I guess it's the flex pattern of the ski that I was mistaking for base bevel/side bevel sharpness. They are Atomic FIS SLs.

So yes he put 0.5 on them and 3 on the side, and I think he said this is what he puts on all skis now. I was fine with that, but I worried that going from 2.5 base to 0.5 base would be difficult to handle.

Nope. Love 'em the same as before. Great hold, far superior to everything else I ski (on hard-snow groomers). The quickness of the tipping may indeed be faster, but my body can't tell the difference from last year's slower response. I'm too busy getting my ski legs back, and talking myself into feeling OK with the speed. Especially that last.

My take-away? Get all my groomer ski bases set at 0.5.

Sharpness has nothing to do geometry. You can have a 2.5/3 with a sharp edge. I have always contended that tuners without some very good means of measuring, routinely over base bevel their skis .

 

[Jacques]

8 degree base bevel?
Maybe just really rounded out edges at the "contact" points from some dumb person at like REI etc.
I find it quite hard to believe.
If a base edge had an 8 degree bevel, IDK if it could even be fixed.
Someone do the math.
The average base material is only like 1.3 to 1.5 mm's before the factory grinds it.
I don't doubt that Mike is an expert, but this just seems quite strange.
Can it really be fixed?

 

[KevinF]

I have always contended that tuners without some very good means of measuring over base bevel their skis .

Mike DeSantis (revered ski tech here in the Boston area) uses the "rule of 60"; i.e., a true bar tilted to match the base edge will be 1mm above the base 60mm away from the edge on a 1 degree base. Likewise, a two degree base would get you 2mm off the base, etc. The math more or less works out that way (i.e, at 60mm, the height above the base in mm is the base bevel in degrees).

I have no doubt that Mike has a far more practiced eye than I do, but I can't judge 1mm vs. 2mm. I have yet to hear a great way to measure angles that are so small.

 

[Atomicman]

Mike DeSantis (revered ski tech here in the Boston area) uses the "rule of 60"; i.e., a true bar tilted to match the base edge will be 1mm above the base 60mm away from the edge on a 1 degree base. Likewise, a two degree base would get you 2mm off the base, etc. The math more or less works out that way (i.e, at 60mm, the height above the base in mm is the base bevel in degrees).

I have no doubt that Mike has a far more practiced eye than I do, but I can't judge 1mm vs. 2mm. I have yet to hear a great way to measure angles that are so small.

I know the 60mm rule, in fact I have quoted it many times here. But that is not how you really "eye" the edge. You get a light source behind the true bar and place it flat against the base and eye the gap over the edge. This allows you to slide the true bar down the ski and see how even the base bevel is. And you can get pretty good at eyeing what the gap between the truebar and the actual edge is.

I use the SVST Pro Bevelmeter

 

[Jacques]

Mike DeSantis (revered ski tech here in the Boston area) uses the "rule of 60"; i.e., a true bar tilted to match the base edge will be 1mm above the base 60mm away from the edge on a 1 degree base. Likewise, a two degree base would get you 2mm off the base, etc. The math more or less works out that way (i.e, at 60mm, the height above the base in mm is the base bevel in degrees).

I have no doubt that Mike has a far more practiced eye than I do, but I can't judge 1mm vs. 2mm. I have yet to hear a great way to measure angles that are so small.

That's what feeler gauges are for. One can get an eye for approximation after much practical experience though. Thing is, that as base bevel "grows" from wear, it becomes more rounded. So a really worn ski base edge.........well, it's not going to measure well. It's simply not going to be a flat portion for a true bar to rest upon.
We are talking about a steel edge that prior to any further filing from the factory is only about 2mm wide.

 

[KevinF]

That's what feeler gauges are for. One can get an eye for approximation after much practical experience though. Thing is, that as base bevel "grows" from wear, it becomes more rounded. So a really worn ski base edge.........well, it's not going to measure well. It's simply not going to be a flat portion for a true bar to rest upon.
We are talking about a steel edge that prior to any further filing from the factory is only about 2mm wide.

I bought a set of feeler gauges the other day... I haven’t had the opportunity to practice yet, but I’d definitely like to have a better idea of how my base edges are doing.

 

[GregK]

8 degree base bevel?
Maybe just really rounded out edges at the "contact" points from some dumb person at like REI etc.
I find it quite hard to believe.
If a base edge had an 8 degree bevel, IDK if it could even be fixed.
Someone do the math.
The average base material is only like 1.3 to 1.5 mm's before the factory grinds it.
I don't doubt that Mike is an expert, but this just seems quite strange.
Can it really be fixed?

I guess if you cut the edge in half, that’s a 45 degree angle and you’d have to grind the entire edge and base height to put that to back to flat which would grind the entire base and edge away.
So you have less than 45 degrees to play with to still have SOME base left after getting it back flat.

To get an 8 degree angle flat again, you’d have to take down the edge/base around 18% of the total base/edge height(8 divided by 45) if my math is correct. So you’d still have a bit over 80% of the base/edge left after correction.

So it’s fixable but would require lots of passes to get flat again. Seems like an insanely high bevel though!

 

[Zrxman01]

I have not seen an SVST bevel meter in stock for a few years now.