A Snow and ski forum. SkiBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SkiBanter forum » Skiing Newsgroups » Nordic Skiing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Too many glide waxes?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 8th 06, 04:16 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Too many glide waxes?

I've wondered if some of us (such as myself) aren't carrying more glide
waxes than we need. Especially living in the midwest, do the
"less-than-elite" need more than 5 or 6 glide waxes? For example, how
would this collection perform?

1. At the coldest temps waxing is usually pretty straightforward, with
standbys like a CH4 or a Start Green, etc.
2, Taking one step up in temperature, Rex Blue has a very wide temp
range for training and is also good for racing when the humidity is
low.
3. At a warmer temp and higher humidity, low Fluoros such as Swix LF7
or LF8 seem to have pretty good range, and Fast Wax Tan has lots of
fans.
4. Most of us want a saturation/storage wax, and a warm wax like CH10
or Rex Violet works well and can also be used for training in warmer
temps.
5 - 6. That leaves another one or two additional waxes to cover
circumstances such as higher than usual humidities. Would one or two
high content or pure fluoros do the job? What would you choose?

I'm curious to know what other skiers think about a "minimalist" wax
box, especially when I look at the waxes I've accumulated over the
years but rarely used.

A second reason for this post is that while the best skiers sometimes
let us know how well they've raced on skis with three to four layers of
(sometimes) exotic wax combinations, some of us (well, me, actually)
who try to get fancy don't always get much bang for the buck. And when
that happens we may not be eager to write in and tell folks that we
blew three hours of waxing/scraping/brushing and $40.00 worth of waxes
just to have slower skis than our buddy who had, say, two coats of Rex
Green. If these "failures" aren't reported, but the success stories
are, it could create the impression that to have a good race you must
have a lot of waxes and a sophisticated grasp of when to use them.
But for those of us without that level of skill are we better off just
sticking to a few waxes that work well over a wide range?

Finally, if we save money on wax, maybe we can add, or stonegrind, a
pair of skis for a specific conditon, giving us a performance boost
that way.

All comments appreciated!

Russ

Ads
  #2  
Old May 8th 06, 12:15 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

one hint that the choice of glidewax is not so important was one
Vasaloppet elite guy I spoke to. He uses CF8 every time on Vasa. No
matter what temp or condition there is.

  #3  
Old May 8th 06, 03:02 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks for the interesting reply. I had assumed the Vasaloppet was
usually skied in warm and humid conditions and that elite skiers would
use some type of fluoro.
One of our better skiers here in Minnesota almost always uses Rex Blue
in our Vasaloppet and Koroloppet, sometimes with a fluoro overlayer.
I haven't skied much on CH8 but I have found that LF8 works well and in
a wider temperature range than the package suggests.

Russ

  #4  
Old May 8th 06, 09:11 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'm using three differents base waxes, "CH" type and then 3 differents
bottles of Nanowax Cerax glide polymere (Pro2, Pro3, Pro4).
I own two manual grinders : Swix and Toko. Applying sometimes Swix
(before hot waxing), and almost always Toko (after hot waxing).
I'm more than happy with that.

Several time I've been able to compare my skis with ones having been
prepared with pure fluoro powders, during races done in pairs. My
co-racer and I had always comparable glide. Those races are very
interesting as you can compare glide during the whole race.

Less time waxing, more time skiing and rocket skis.
What else ?

Still, applying the correct wax is not "that" important;
Removing it is important ;-) (i.e : brushing).

BTW, I don't think that more than two layers exists with gliding waxes.
Think, at 120 °c, there's a mix of everything, more or less bound and/or
dissolved to the base and maybe a final coating (polymere or pure fluoro).

waxing/scraping/brushing will have the mechanical effect to remove hairs
the base, that would perhaps be better removed with fibertex or the
apparently unanimously approved OmniPrep Pad (never tried as it is not
available here in France)

Laurent.

a écrit :
I've wondered if some of us (such as myself) aren't carrying more glide
waxes than we need. Especially living in the midwest, do the
"less-than-elite" need more than 5 or 6 glide waxes? For example, how
would this collection perform?

1. At the coldest temps waxing is usually pretty straightforward, with
standbys like a CH4 or a Start Green, etc.
2, Taking one step up in temperature, Rex Blue has a very wide temp
range for training and is also good for racing when the humidity is
low.
3. At a warmer temp and higher humidity, low Fluoros such as Swix LF7
or LF8 seem to have pretty good range, and Fast Wax Tan has lots of
fans.
4. Most of us want a saturation/storage wax, and a warm wax like CH10
or Rex Violet works well and can also be used for training in warmer
temps.
5 - 6. That leaves another one or two additional waxes to cover
circumstances such as higher than usual humidities. Would one or two
high content or pure fluoros do the job? What would you choose?

I'm curious to know what other skiers think about a "minimalist" wax
box, especially when I look at the waxes I've accumulated over the
years but rarely used.

A second reason for this post is that while the best skiers sometimes
let us know how well they've raced on skis with three to four layers of
(sometimes) exotic wax combinations, some of us (well, me, actually)
who try to get fancy don't always get much bang for the buck. And when
that happens we may not be eager to write in and tell folks that we
blew three hours of waxing/scraping/brushing and $40.00 worth of waxes
just to have slower skis than our buddy who had, say, two coats of Rex
Green. If these "failures" aren't reported, but the success stories
are, it could create the impression that to have a good race you must
have a lot of waxes and a sophisticated grasp of when to use them.
But for those of us without that level of skill are we better off just
sticking to a few waxes that work well over a wide range?

Finally, if we save money on wax, maybe we can add, or stonegrind, a
pair of skis for a specific conditon, giving us a performance boost
that way.

All comments appreciated!

Russ

  #5  
Old May 8th 06, 10:11 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Laurent,

I was hoping someone would mention the use of Toko, which I don't use.
Toko's idea of mixing waxes means we can buy fewer waxes; on the other
hand, we can also complicate our lives trying to figure out how much of
each wax to mix.

I'm also interested to hear that you're using Cerax, whose popularity
has dimmed here. Are you skiing in a predominantly dry or a humid
climate?

When you mention "manual grinders" are you talking about what we call a
"riller" for adding structure to the base?

OmniPrep: I've used it but I haven't seen a benefit over fine
(white) Fibertex, although I'm told there is one.

I didn't mention in my original post that one of the reasons for asking
the question about a reduced wax kit is my observation that skiers of
similar ability may do equally with very different waxes, e.g., when
one waxes with a cold temp pure paraffin/plastic, e.g., for 15 degrees
F and below, while the other is using a high fluoro rated for 12 to 28
degrees F. In a long race I can imagine that one skier might do well
at the start when the temperature is cold, while the other does better
as the day warms up. In any case, if conditions vary that much, should
I spend too much time worrying about getting the wax just right? I
think the answer (for me) is "no."

Thanks for the reply.

Russ

  #6  
Old May 9th 06, 10:32 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Russ,

I was not talking about mixing wax intentionnaly, I was just indicating
that applying different "layers" is a sort of nonsense with gliding
waxes. Everything mixes, obvioulsy.
Waxing/scraping/brushing many times may have an impact to the base but
not to the resulting final waxing for a particular day.

Yes, I was talking about using "rillers". The Swix and the Toko ones as
mentionned.

Ski conditions in France varies a lot, but never really dry exept in
some places like Bessans.

Talking about Nanowax (Cerax). I did several marathon races in pair with
my brother
He's very carefuly waxing his skis the "traditionnal" way : one base
"layer", one HF "layer" and then one pure fluoro powder "layer". He's
not tempering with the factory stonegrind.
I'm waxing the "nanowax" way : One base prep (Briko "CH" type), rilling,
final Nanowax Cerax coating.

So, we are skiing together, at race pace, during 42 kms. (Okay he's
waiting a bit for me during uphills. He's ranked 121 at the 2006
Transjurassienne Worldloppet , which is a fairly good result. I'm 247
and quite prood of it).

Any major glide difference ? No.
Minor difference ? slight better glide for me on wet conditions.
Of course, our skis are different and fitted for each other. He's taller
and more athletic. He's on Rossignol (stiff and medium), I'm on Vandel
(soft and medium).

So, my advice is to have two pairs of well-fitted skis and then "cheap"
waxes. (Nanowax maye be considered as cheap in its category as a 40
Euros bottle does for 15 to 18 times.)

I like "wet" bases as they are soft and accept manual structures easily.
The structure disappearing after a couple of hot-waxing.

On a correct base, waxes durability his high (powder or Nanowax) and
lasts more than 42 kms.


Laurent


a écrit :
Laurent,

I was hoping someone would mention the use of Toko, which I don't use.
Toko's idea of mixing waxes means we can buy fewer waxes; on the other
hand, we can also complicate our lives trying to figure out how much of
each wax to mix.

I'm also interested to hear that you're using Cerax, whose popularity
has dimmed here. Are you skiing in a predominantly dry or a humid
climate?

When you mention "manual grinders" are you talking about what we call a
"riller" for adding structure to the base?

OmniPrep: I've used it but I haven't seen a benefit over fine
(white) Fibertex, although I'm told there is one.

I didn't mention in my original post that one of the reasons for asking
the question about a reduced wax kit is my observation that skiers of
similar ability may do equally with very different waxes, e.g., when
one waxes with a cold temp pure paraffin/plastic, e.g., for 15 degrees
F and below, while the other is using a high fluoro rated for 12 to 28
degrees F. In a long race I can imagine that one skier might do well
at the start when the temperature is cold, while the other does better
as the day warms up. In any case, if conditions vary that much, should
I spend too much time worrying about getting the wax just right? I
think the answer (for me) is "no."

Thanks for the reply.

Russ

  #7  
Old May 11th 06, 12:06 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

There are several situations in which it is useful to have a selection of
competitive brands for each temperature and snow condition you might
encounter.

The first situation is if you have a speed trap and several sets of
calibrated skis. You can actually measure the difference for the different
waxes and base treatments that might be best for the current conditions and
pick the best combination. Usually this involves the use of ski technicians
and a test skier who will test at race time the day before the race and
again on race day if conditions change.

Another situation is if you have access to reports from a team who is doing
wax testing and want to try to match their selection as closely as possible.

Other than that, you are probably best to restrict yourself to a few
favourites for the conditions you usually encounter and something for
extreme cold and extreme wet if you don't usually ski in those conditions.

Scott

wrote in message
oups.com...
I've wondered if some of us (such as myself) aren't carrying more glide
waxes than we need. Especially living in the midwest, do the
"less-than-elite" need more than 5 or 6 glide waxes? For example, how
would this collection perform?

1. At the coldest temps waxing is usually pretty straightforward, with
standbys like a CH4 or a Start Green, etc.
2, Taking one step up in temperature, Rex Blue has a very wide temp
range for training and is also good for racing when the humidity is
low.
3. At a warmer temp and higher humidity, low Fluoros such as Swix LF7
or LF8 seem to have pretty good range, and Fast Wax Tan has lots of
fans.
4. Most of us want a saturation/storage wax, and a warm wax like CH10
or Rex Violet works well and can also be used for training in warmer
temps.
5 - 6. That leaves another one or two additional waxes to cover
circumstances such as higher than usual humidities. Would one or two
high content or pure fluoros do the job? What would you choose?

I'm curious to know what other skiers think about a "minimalist" wax
box, especially when I look at the waxes I've accumulated over the
years but rarely used.

A second reason for this post is that while the best skiers sometimes
let us know how well they've raced on skis with three to four layers of
(sometimes) exotic wax combinations, some of us (well, me, actually)
who try to get fancy don't always get much bang for the buck. And when
that happens we may not be eager to write in and tell folks that we
blew three hours of waxing/scraping/brushing and $40.00 worth of waxes
just to have slower skis than our buddy who had, say, two coats of Rex
Green. If these "failures" aren't reported, but the success stories
are, it could create the impression that to have a good race you must
have a lot of waxes and a sophisticated grasp of when to use them.
But for those of us without that level of skill are we better off just
sticking to a few waxes that work well over a wide range?

Finally, if we save money on wax, maybe we can add, or stonegrind, a
pair of skis for a specific conditon, giving us a performance boost
that way.

All comments appreciated!

Russ



  #8  
Old May 11th 06, 12:21 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Scott,

As you say, if you have access to traps, well-matched skis,
technicians, etc., then waxing can be a whole different world.

But, as you conclude, if you don't have those resources, sticking to a
small set of waxes that you know how to use is probably the way to go.

I think my (beginner's) error was to be impressed by what I saw at
World Cup races, and what I heard from elite skiers with decades of
experience, and to think that a big wax box was a way that I could
"buy" speed.

Any comments you care to make on what you have found to be a good,
basic, wax kit would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Russ

  #9  
Old May 11th 06, 05:33 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I've had very good luck with the Swix wax wizard. Check the weather forecast
and wax a day or two before traveling to the event. In cold, low humidity
races I almost exclusively use the CH hydrocarbon waxes, so a wax job only
costs $3-5.
Purchasing 900 gram bulk packs also saves cash.
Some might see the Swix line as confusing, due to the sheer number of waxes.
But the individual waxes are optimized for the condition designed for. There
is overlap and the waxes will run farther than specified.
http://www.swixsport.com/waxwizard.asp

Paul Haltvick
Bay Design and Build - LLC
Engineering, Construction and Information Technology Services
FSx - Fischer / Swix Racing



  #10  
Old May 11th 06, 06:17 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Rex blue was a good wax, but I won't consider it for racing now unless
the conditions are very dry. There's too many other waxes that are
faster. LF6 is certainly better.

My experience is with Swix, and my normal race waxes a

LF4
LF5 (mix of 4 and 6)
LF6 or LF6 with Cera FC1 (depends on humidity)
HF7 or BD7 with Cera 7 or 8 (or a mix of 7/8)
HF8 with Cera 8

The only reason I use the CH waxes is to prep the skis for other waxes.
I normally train on LF waxes and I purchase both the CH and LF waxes in
bulk (180 gram x 5) quantities (1 ea of 4, 6, 7, and 2 of 8). It's a
great way to go. I have also been training on other waxes (including HF
waxes) that I've purchased through the years but didn't particularly
get into using, e.g. Toko, Solda, Rex, Start, Holmenkoln.

If you're not into racing, a wax box with LF4, LF6 and LF8 would be
very good for only having three waxes.

Jay Wenner

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
skate skiing technique question wintermutt Nordic Skiing 8 February 8th 05 05:24 PM
fluor kick waxes? Mitch Collinsworth Nordic Skiing 7 February 5th 05 09:42 PM
A V2 timing question Chris Crawford Nordic Skiing 16 December 15th 04 03:03 PM
Do all polymer glide waxes need to be removed with cleaners i.e Cerax and Start Golden Line? Douglas Diehl Nordic Skiing 4 March 29th 04 03:57 PM
glide: skating vs. traditional??? Ken Roberts Nordic Skiing 4 August 22nd 03 11:57 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SkiBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.