New ski edge bevels

[CalG]

Those values seem quite useful.

Consistent side edge angles across many ski types (1.5 degrees +/-)
Base angle depending on application. I guess it's not really rocket science. ;-)

A number of ski shops have asked the ski brands to print the tune edge/base bevel specs on the skis, or at least to print them in their retail or tech annual manuals.

Not sure they can, on the skis. And a look at the published manual specs below give some sense of why not, and why I'm so often having to check and adjust the edge bevels on new skis, if I'm expecting them to fit nicely into the whole number angles on my edge tools.

Can you imagine seeing these specs (with tolerances built in) printed on retail skis?

If Atomic and Salomon are any indication, most skis are made to such manufacturer tolerances, including for base and edge bevels, rather than a fixed pair of specs in degrees (say, 1/2). This year, Atomic and Salomon did put their specs with tolerances in their Alpine tech manuals (18/19, published 6/10/18). If you look at the stuff, you get things like the following: (whew)

From Atomic:

Redster series 87.5° ± 0.05° 0.8° ± 0.3°

snip the table of values

°

 

[markojp]

Well I agree, but what's the answer? This is the way it is right now. At one time you had the ski mags which probably could have considerable influence on an issue like this. That probably stopped in the early 2000's if it even made it past the millenium.

We have an industry that constantly talks about titanium in their skis when it's aluminum. They never get called on it even by industry insiders. Most are like, oh that's funny.
So, it's just another sloppy thing.

The manufacturers of the very expensive tuning machines seem to have forgotten about the end product. Seems they focus on it can do x,y,z in such a time. I don't see the systemization of quality control to the end product. So you end up with highly complex machines that really need a highly qualified operator. And more than 1 because they can't work all the time. Labor is tough in ski towns. You train someone for a few years and then they go off and want to like get married, or a job that pays more, or live where the people are.

James, this is just silly. They most certainly haven't forgotten about the end product, and it's a very tough sales field. We've just ordered a new machine... north of 200k. Our shop master had a large say in the order. And yes, you're right. Machines need expert operators, and indeed, they aren't paid what they're worth. There's no easy fix for this other than knowing who really does a good job in their respective regions... I also think there's a business model out there waiting for an investor.

 

[Noodler]

To me, it's a little bit of both, skier and ski - and also intended use by that particular skier for that particular ski. I notice I like different edge and base bevels for different skis, depending on their usage and design, and even for different skiing styles I might want to play with. For instance, a 2° edge bevel has a smoother feel to it, while still feeling precise enough on the right ski, while a 3° edge gives a sharper, more grippy feel that is often nice to have too. Again, a 0.5° underfoot base bevel can be great for a precise slalom ski especially, quick edge to edge with quick translation from boot to ski. At the other extreme, a 2° base bevel can be great on a freestyle ski, giving more of a forgiving, playful feel to a ski that is either used mostly slarving off piste or in powder, or that benefits from a looser, or more trickable feel (say, a pair of Faction C.T. 3.0). Just wanting a change of pace can be reason enough to use different base and edge angles.

I "feel" base bevel differences, but my perception of the side edge angles I only get from the grip performance coming back at me from the ski. Clearly there is interplay between the two angles that build the edge "corner", but I believe that base edge bevel issues will be sensed by most skiers who have been around the block once or twice. They may not know that it's a problem with the base bevels, but they'll know that something is wrong.

 

[Noodler]

A number of ski shops have asked the ski brands to print the tune edge/base bevel specs on the skis, or at least to print them in their retail or tech annual manuals.

Not sure they can, on the skis. And a look at the published manual specs below give some sense of why not, and why I'm so often having to check and adjust the edge bevels on new skis, if I'm expecting them to fit nicely into the whole number angles on my edge tools.

Can you imagine seeing these specs (with tolerances built in) printed on retail skis?

If Atomic and Salomon are any indication, most skis are made to such manufacturer tolerances, including for base and edge bevels, rather than a fixed pair of specs in degrees (say, 1/2). This year, Atomic and Salomon did put their specs with tolerances in their Alpine tech manuals (18/19, published 6/10/18). If you look at the stuff, you get things like the following: (whew)

From Atomic:

Redster series 87.5° ± 0.05° 0.8° ± 0.3°

Cloud series 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Vantage x83/80 87.5° ± 0.5° 0.8° ± 0.3°

Vantage x75/77 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Vantage wmn x 80 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Vantage wmn x 74/77 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.3° ± 0.3°

Vantage 107ti/97c 87.5° ± 0.5° 0.8° ± 0.3°

Vantage 97ti/90/86c 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Bent Chet series 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Backland 85/78 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Backland 95 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.3° ± 0.3°

Backland UL 65 87.5° ± 0.5° 0.8° ± 0.3°

Backland 85/78 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Backland 117/107 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Backland wmn 102 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.3° ± 0.3°

Park & Pipe series 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.3° ± 0.3°


And from Salomon:

Quest family 85 base side 1.3°→ 1.5°, edge side 1.5°→ 2.0°

92 base side 1.3° → 1.5°, edge side 1.5°→ 2.0°

99 base side 1.3° → 1.5°, edge side 1.5°→ 2.0°

106 base side 1.3° → 1.5°, edge side 1.5°→ 2.0°

118 base side 1.3° → 1.5°, edge side 1.5°→ 2.0°

S/Race GS & GS FIS base 0.8° ± 0.3°, edge/side 2°→ 2.5°

S/Race pro SL base 0.5° ± 0.3°, edge/side 2°→ 2.5°

S/Race SG FIS base 1° ± 0.3°, edge/side 2° → 2.5°

S/Race Pro 182-175 base 1° ± 0.3°, edge/side 2° → 2.5°

S/Max base 1° ± 0.3°, edge/side 1.5°→ 2°

XDR base 1.3° ± 0.3°, side/edge 1.5°→ 2°

XDR 80ti, 84ti, 88ti base 1.3° ± 0.3°, side/edge 1.5→ 2.0°

XDR 76-78-79,

Aira 76-78-79,

S/Race Rush, S/Max Blast, S/Race Slot, base 1.0 ± 0.3°, side 1.5°→ 1.2°

What exactly is the point of all these specs published by the manufacturers? There is nothing in ski designs, that I'm aware of, that would dictate particular side or base edge angles. Manufacturers certainly can suggest that they like/recommend certain edge angle setups, but once again, this is really personal preference and dependent on lots of variables, like terrain and conditions, that the manufacturers couldn't possibly know about where/how their skis will be used.

Sorry, but this is practically useless information for me in the end. Maybe somewhat interesting to see what the current thinking is coming out of some of the manufacturers, but doesn't impact my decision making process for what bevels I will run on certain skis.

 

[Andy Mink]

but doesn't impact my decision making process for deciding on the bevels I will run on certain skis.

But it will give you an idea of what you are starting with (or should be starting with). I try and keep in mind that the majority of recreational skiers likely have no idea what we're even discussing here. If they can find their new ski is supposedly set at x/y it gives them just a bit more knowledge. For instance, when I started back skiing a few years ago I had no idea that edges weren't supposed to be a perfect 90° like I used to do back in the 70s and 80s. Maybe I was wrong then, too!

 

[Noodler]

But it will give you an idea of what you are starting with (or should be starting with). I try and keep in mind that the majority of recreational skiers likely have no idea what we're even discussing here. If they can find their new ski is supposedly set at x/y it gives them just a bit more knowledge. For instance, when I started back skiing a few years ago I had no idea that edges weren't supposed to be a perfect 90° like I used to do back in the 70s and 80s. Maybe I was wrong then, too!

Point taken. That's why we discuss this stuff, right?

 

[CalG]

James, this is just silly. They most certainly haven't forgotten about the end product, and it's a very tough sales field. We've just ordered a new machine... north of 200k. Our shop master had a large say in the order. And yes, you're right. Machines need expert operators, and indeed, they aren't paid what they're worth. There's no easy fix for this other than knowing who really does a good job in their respective regions... I also think there's a business model out there waiting for an investor.

Mark,

How many "production machines" are there that would produce a flat base and a 2 degree side edge (on a new ski) that wouldn't run the ski manufacturer into insolvency trying to meet customer expectations.?

From my experience, a belt over contact wheels is the best "business model". Perhaps the newer "stone ground base" machines (aka $200K) could run 1000 pairs of skis per day economically/ IDK.

Bottom line, Some one is going to pay for any "improvements" in the new ski prep and tune process.

 

[Sibhusky]

A number of ski shops have asked the ski brands to print the tune edge/base bevel specs on the skis, or at least to print them in their retail or tech annual manuals.

Not sure they can, on the skis. And a look at the published manual specs below give some sense of why not, and why I'm so often having to check and adjust the edge bevels on new skis, if I'm expecting them to fit nicely into the whole number angles on my edge tools.

Can you imagine seeing these specs (with tolerances built in) printed on retail skis?

If Atomic and Salomon are any indication, most skis are made to such manufacturer tolerances, including for base and edge bevels, rather than a fixed pair of specs in degrees (say, 1/2). This year, Atomic and Salomon did put their specs with tolerances in their Alpine tech manuals (18/19, published 6/10/18). If you look at the stuff, you get things like the following: (whew)

From Atomic:

Redster series 87.5° ± 0.05° 0.8° ± 0.3°

Cloud series 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Vantage x83/80 87.5° ± 0.5° 0.8° ± 0.3°

Vantage x75/77 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Vantage wmn x 80 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Vantage wmn x 74/77 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.3° ± 0.3°

Vantage 107ti/97c 87.5° ± 0.5° 0.8° ± 0.3°

Vantage 97ti/90/86c 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Bent Chet series 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Backland 85/78 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Backland 95 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.3° ± 0.3°

Backland UL 65 87.5° ± 0.5° 0.8° ± 0.3°

Backland 85/78 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Backland 117/107 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.0° ± 0.3°

Backland wmn 102 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.3° ± 0.3°

Park & Pipe series 87.5° ± 0.5° 1.3° ± 0.3°


And from Salomon:

Quest family 85 base side 1.3°→ 1.5°, edge side 1.5°→ 2.0°

92 base side 1.3° → 1.5°, edge side 1.5°→ 2.0°

99 base side 1.3° → 1.5°, edge side 1.5°→ 2.0°

106 base side 1.3° → 1.5°, edge side 1.5°→ 2.0°

118 base side 1.3° → 1.5°, edge side 1.5°→ 2.0°

S/Race GS & GS FIS base 0.8° ± 0.3°, edge/side 2°→ 2.5°

S/Race pro SL base 0.5° ± 0.3°, edge/side 2°→ 2.5°

S/Race SG FIS base 1° ± 0.3°, edge/side 2° → 2.5°

S/Race Pro 182-175 base 1° ± 0.3°, edge/side 2° → 2.5°

S/Max base 1° ± 0.3°, edge/side 1.5°→ 2°

XDR base 1.3° ± 0.3°, side/edge 1.5°→ 2°

XDR 80ti, 84ti, 88ti base 1.3° ± 0.3°, side/edge 1.5→ 2.0°

XDR 76-78-79,

Aira 76-78-79,

S/Race Rush, S/Max Blast, S/Race Slot, base 1.0 ± 0.3°, side 1.5°→ 1.2°

I just LOVE the fact that some of those base bevels are greater than 1°!!! There should be a tag that just says, Get Your Shop to Stone Grind These Puppies Before You Use Them Because They Are Already Over Beveled.

 

[James]

James, this is just silly. They most certainly haven't forgotten about the end product, and it's a very tough sales field. We've just ordered a new machine... north of 200k. Our shop master had a large say in the order. And yes, you're right. Machines need expert operators, and indeed, they aren't paid what they're worth. There's no easy fix for this other than knowing who really does a good job in their respective regions... I also think there's a business model out there waiting for an investor.

It's not silly at all. We wouldn't be having this conversation if it wasn't an issue.
If they were so concerned, why is there not a system in the machine to monitor flatness? Where's the feedback loop?
It's a guy with a true bar afaik.

Essentially, robotic machines, which have been in VT since roughly 2002, promised a quality finished product. Yet, it takes a lot of skill to get a good product. Constant checking.

From my experience, a belt over contact wheels is the best "business model". Perhaps the newer "stone ground base" machines (aka $200K) could run 1000 pairs of skis per day economically/ IDK.

Belt over wheels is for very rough work.
Machines that can do 100 pairs per hour are probably 3 x that 200k.
A completely manual basic stone grinder is like 40k.
On a manufacturing level there's no real reason I can see . The one big factor I don't know is how long a recently pressed ski has to sit for all the resins to stabilize so things don't move.

 

[Pat AKA mustski]

But if you buy something you should be able to expect it to work. If nothing else the edges should be consistant from tip to tail, both sides, both skis. Not everyone knows how to "hit the edges", nor should they have to on a brand new ski.

I find it confusing as well. Any other product I purchase, I expect it be quality and ready to go without needing work. I can't imagine purchasing a home appliance that needed to be repaired in order to function properly. There are those who will want the edges changed to meet their needs, but the ski should be skiable and safe. I had a pair of Auras that were so badly railed that I had a hard time making it down an easy groomer safely. The conditions were icy and one ski was next to impossible to control. I could have been hurt and I could have hurt someone else. Quality control is a reasonable expectation for a consumer. Once fixed, I loved those skis! Good thing it wasn't a demo or I wouldn't have even considered purchasing them. I own 3 different pairs of Volkls. I love Volkl skis but not that day.

 

[CalG]

I just LOVE the fact that some of those base bevels are greater than 1°!!! There should be a tag that just says, Get Your Shop to Stone Grind These Puppies Before You Use Them Because They Are Already Over Beveled.

Do you feel the parks and pipes skiers would regard >1degree base bevel as "over beveled"?

Or the novice who is still wedging every turn, or the child that could care less, and actually be better off with more than 1 degree base bevel.

There are so many factors in determination of "best edge geometry". I would just like to see a consistently mediocre result in the racks.

 

[oldschoolskier]

Well I agree, but what's the answer? This is the way it is right now. At one time you had the ski mags which probably could have considerable influence on an issue like this. That probably stopped in the early 2000's if it even made it past the millenium.

We have an industry that constantly talks about titanium in their skis when it's aluminum. They never get called on it even by industry insiders. Most are like, oh that's funny.
So, it's just another sloppy thing.

The manufacturers of the very expensive tuning machines seem to have forgotten about the end product. Seems they focus on it can do x,y,z in such a time. I don't see the systemization of quality control to the end product. So you end up with highly complex machines that really need a highly qualified operator. And more than 1 because they can't work all the time. Labor is tough in ski towns. You train someone for a few years and then they go off and want to like get married, or a job that pays more, or live where the people are.

Titanium, well that is an error in confusing a Brand “Titanal” specialized formulation of aluminum alloy invented in Austria and assuming they meant titanium. You know what they say about assume, makes and ass out of u and me.

Personally, I have not experienced a bad tune yet from a major manufacturer, however based on what I’m reading I suspect that select buyers are saving initial costs by spec’ing skis that aren’t ground to save a few bucks and make a major bucks by charging the consumers an initial grind (where they do a good one or not).

As to a solution of the grind issue, considering some of the videos (how it’s made) showing the specialized grind machines manufacturers have so that skis are ready to go to the consumer. The solution is easy, call the on it in the magazines suggested, better yet a good article and inquisitive report from sites like this does bring it to the fore front as an issue. Additionally offer them a solution, that this practice does hurt their brand and initial tune is what’s expected. If sold not tune (specific applications ie race room) unsure skis are marked as such and the consumer is not mislead.

Retailers that remove such marking should lose all indemnification certificates. That way everyone’s playing on equal footing.

This should solve most of the issues except for those few that don’t care.

 

[oldschoolskier]

In terms of bevels here is a simple guide that should work for everyone.

Beginners 1 base, 2 side. Slope ready
Generic Rental 1 base, 2 side, Slope ready.
Intermediate 1 base, 2 or 3 side, Slope ready
Advance 0.5 base, 3 side, allows for customization but is still aggressively slope ready.

Park, Race and other specialized skis, 0 base, 0 side, ready for customized tune and setup. Not slope ready.

All skis should come with an all condition generic grind to ensure flatness. Where it goes from there is the choose of the end user.

The good thing about this type of concept is everyone understands what they are getting, and meets the demands of all.

 

[Wilhelmson]

Not trying to throw anyone at the bus, just a suggestion and as some mentioned some shops do present the customer with a ski in skiable condition. I'm not too fussy; ski them out of the wrapper and file the edges after a few days out. Grind every 100 days if at all, maybe just freshen up with some sandpaper if I feel like it. I've had concave skis that were fine enough for me.

If you're selling skis at online prices, no tune / no prob but you still haven't given me a good reason to choose your shop over other vendors. The larger problem as I see it is if a novice or child is sold a malfunctioning ski and they don't know any better. If the ski is railed it could be a basic courtesy to tell the customer it might cost $50 to $100 to tune it rather than sending them out into the wild uninformed. Funny thing is I had a ski emergency and bought my kid some barely used skis at a shop - freshly ground base, sharp edges, waxed, bindings adjusted, out the door for $200. Guess which shop I'll go to next time I'm in that area?

 

[Tricia]

Phil talks about this in his article series;
Anatomy of a Ski Test
Anatomy of a Ski Test Pt 2
Quote from Pt 2

What if a ski has a bad tune? This did happen again, unfortunately; one of the skis we wanted to focus on was railed in the forebody. I am not sure if the rep knew it before we took the ski out, but a few of us were on some bad skis. We were able to discern why the ski wasn't skiing well, but how many didn’t know and just thought the skis weren't very good?

If I’m buying a top end ski, I would reasonably expect it to be tuned to a basic high end condition ready to go.

We had three years in a row of bad tunes out of a premium brand at ski test. This past year they brought their A game to the tent and it showed.

As Phil said in the articles he wrote about this; How many people don't know its a tune issue? How many people believe the ski sucks?

 

[Swiss Toni]

What exactly is the point of all these specs published by the manufacturers?

Marketing.

How many "production machines" are there that would produce a flat base and a 2 degree side edge (on a new ski) that wouldn't run the ski manufacturer into insolvency trying to meet customer expectations.?

None! There is always a tolerance, for the Wintersteiger Discovery and their other automatic machines it’s 0.25 degrees for both base and side edge angles, for the Trim NC standalone edge grinder it’s 0.1 degrees.

Because the stone is constantly being eroded the base structure also varies both along the length of the base and from ski to ski.

Titan is the German word for titanium, Titanal is often mistranslated into English as titanium, maybe it's because you probably wouldn’t like your mom to be around if you pronounced the first three letters followed by the last four! There is actually a tiny amount of titanium in it which is presumably why some bright spark at Völkl decided to claim that their skis are “powered by Titanium”.

 

[Philpug]

But it will give you an idea of what you are starting with (or should be starting with). I try and keep in mind that the majority of recreational skiers likely have no idea what we're even discussing here.

Most..and I mean 60%+ recreational skiers don't even know that skis have to be waxed...and if they do need waxed it might have to be done more than *ghasp* once a year!

 

[markojp]

The one big factor I don't know is how long a recently pressed ski has to sit for all the resins to stabilize so things don't move.

There you go. So long as wood is in the equation....

 

[oldschoolskier]

For manufacturers even Mom and Pop ones, you are using stable wood (better be), and resins. If you don’t know set times.

This is not rocket science, this is give it shape (here a little knowledge is important), some graphics, use good materials glue (correct glue) together and grind.

The difference in the ultra performance skis is the selection of the ultra perfect spec’d materials and setup, everything else easy.

Heck even amateurs are building one of skis with success. Next new skier manufacturer.

 

[Tricia]

One of the things Kästle is proud of is the base structure the put on a ski from the factory, but I wonder if the 25 passes of structure grind end up putting out a ski that is flat and needs a base bevel put on by the consumer