Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

This is the World Famous TelemarkTalk / TelemarkTips Forum, by far the most dynamic telemark and backcountry skiing discussion board on the world wide web. We have fun here, come on in and be a part of it.
User avatar
lowangle al

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 917
Joined: Sat Jan 11, 2014 4:36 pm

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby lowangle al » Mon Feb 19, 2018 12:19 pm

Woodserson wrote:
lowangle al wrote:
Gareth, I was out yesterday and came up with a trick that made touring with T4s better. I buckled the lower buckle over the plastic tongue like normal, but I put the upper buckle under the tongue. It allowed for better ROM for K&G and may help with your HWs. Give it a try.


Going to try this today


How did it go?

User avatar
Woodserson

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 896
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:25 am
Location: New Hampshire

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby Woodserson » Mon Feb 19, 2018 5:40 pm

Just rolled back moments, it worked really well. I have the higher foam liners. Thanks for the tip, Al!

Chisana

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2017 1:13 am

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby Chisana » Tue Feb 20, 2018 12:23 am

lowangle al wrote:
Chisana wrote:If you are referring to the old excel arctic poles with the big baskets, I used mine today. Tough poles. Handles now are mostly friction tape, and one basket has about had it. Replaced the other basket years ago with one I found at amh. On the lookout for another basket. My favorite poles, though I still use my bamboo poles a lot and also my ramer adjustables. I don't think any of these poles are less than 25 years old.
02 19 07_0776.JPG

Do you mean these? I picked up a spare pair for parts from Play it Again Sports. I'll see if I have one I can spare.

Yep, those be the ones. Think I can get another season or two out of them with a ziptie repair,but would love to find a basket for sale lying around one of the shops.

greatgt

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:37 am

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby greatgt » Tue Feb 20, 2018 9:22 am

LA those are the poles and I think....they...stopped making them because....you couldn't' t destroy them! far as double camber when on the down the gliders are doing the speedy thing and the wax pocket is left kinda...sorta high and dry...Makes for more speed as the wax or scales aren't engaged...My old beater e 109's kick the snot outta them every time...on the down....on the flats....on the ups.... evidence....can that be wrong??????????? Heh.... teleman

iBjorn

Rank: XCD Pinhead
XCD Pinhead
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 5:21 pm

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby iBjorn » Tue Feb 20, 2018 10:15 am

Brilliant move to buckle up under the Tongue, I have tested to ski/tour T4´s without the tongue and the difference is dramatic. But it is fiddly to remove the tongue, and I do like the tongue on the downhill. Never thought of this to solve the problem, must test it later.

Thanks for the tip of getting old liners, unfortunatly I am on the other side of the big water - so it is expensive to order. I also have to sort out my Scarpa F1 boot/liner problem/mess, my fiancee will hurt me badly if a bring another liner or boot home...

IMG_5241.JPG


...and yes, there are a few liners missing in the photo...

connyro

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 772
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:46 pm

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby connyro » Tue Feb 20, 2018 10:20 am

greatgt wrote:LA those are the poles and I think....they...stopped making them because....you couldn't' t destroy them! far as double camber when on the down the gliders are doing the speedy thing and the wax pocket is left kinda...sorta high and dry...Makes for more speed as the wax or scales aren't engaged...My old beater e 109's kick the snot outta them every time...on the down....on the flats....on the ups.... evidence....can that be wrong??????????? Heh.... teleman


Based on what you've posted in the past, you've said that you don't turn much if at all. Instead, you say you like to arc which is fine, but not really what most other skiers are doing on the down. Where I ski, we have low but steep vertical so we like to TURN a lot to keep the speed in check. In this case, it's irrelevant how fast our skis glide when we are trying to check speed. So I think you are trying to compare apples to oranges. You arc on non -steep snow and as a result, you will go faster on your XC gear. We ski on steep, narrow, rocky slopes which requires many controlled turns and shorter, wide skis. Long DC skis and leathers get eaten up in narrow, steep terrain. I know, I know, you ski steeps too and shred everything on your XC skis, but based on your photos I've seen of your clan skiing over the years, you are skiing low angle most of the time. Your XC gear is going to do best in low-angle.

greatgt

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 8:37 am

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby greatgt » Tue Feb 20, 2018 8:43 pm

Uh, connie....your glaciers left @ the same time ours did I think....Your terrain is about the same as here but we have many places with over 3000 feet of vertical.....In those spaces is whatever you explained....We just have more of it...No big deal....We have skied many of the Northern Mountains on skinnies....many have all terrain...Meaning steep, moderate, and low angle as you have....You just have less sustained downhill...I don't know if you have ever skied Tuckerman's ravine ], Gulf of Slides, but they are steep....have you ever heard an entire lift line cheering?....Have you looked over the top and looked down...Couldn't believe that people could ski it...First time it was a tremendous fall on my 215 e99's...Bout 700 feet...Teleking and I went into training...Camels Hump...Mt. Mansfield from the top...We trained for the steeps...Went back and did the deed on The Gulf of Slides...then Tuckerman's....People Cheered and came over to us and party's were had. Those days it was 210 e99's....One women took her shirt off...Good God!....Now we ski in the hills around here on steep...moderate...low angle when it suits our purpose...Comes down to conditions...Conny didn't your mother ever tell you.... you don't build yourself up by putting others down...I'm an oldie Connie but still doing it and having a blast....last week went up a hill shot a thousand and there was steep....moderate and low angle at the bottom....Also skied crust and smush too...That was low angle...Look at the pictures again connie and get a life...Teleman

martin2007

Rank: XCD Enthusiast
XCD Enthusiast
Posts: 50
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:23 pm

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby martin2007 » Tue Feb 20, 2018 9:01 pm

Man, Al, I wouldn't have thought of that, two different poles. That's thinking out of the box. I was joking with a ski tech a few days ago about skiing in mismatched boots as I was getting heel pieces moved backwards and wanted to accommodate two different boot sets. Mismatched poles. I'll give it some thought. At the very least, it would be a great conversation-starter!

connyro

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 772
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2015 12:46 pm

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby connyro » Tue Feb 20, 2018 9:48 pm

greatgt wrote:Uh, connie....your glaciers left @ the same time ours did I think....Your terrain is about the same as here but we have many places with over 3000 feet of vertical.....In those spaces is whatever you explained....We just have more of it...No big deal....We have skied many of the Northern Mountains on skinnies....many have all terrain...Meaning steep, moderate, and low angle as you have....You just have less sustained downhill...I don't know if you have ever skied Tuckerman's ravine ], Gulf of Slides, but they are steep....have you ever heard an entire lift line cheering?....Have you looked over the top and looked down...Couldn't believe that people could ski it...First time it was a tremendous fall on my 215 e99's...Bout 700 feet...Teleking and I went into training...Camels Hump...Mt. Mansfield from the top...We trained for the steeps...Went back and did the deed on The Gulf of Slides...then Tuckerman's....People Cheered and came over to us and party's were had. Those days it was 210 e99's....One women took her shirt off...Good God!....Now we ski in the hills around here on steep...moderate...low angle when it suits our purpose...Comes down to conditions...Conny didn't your mother ever tell you.... you don't build yourself up by putting others down...I'm an oldie Connie but still doing it and having a blast....last week went up a hill shot a thousand and there was steep....moderate and low angle at the bottom....Also skied crust and smush too...That was low angle...Look at the pictures again connie and get a life...Teleman

Chill out gramps. Don't be so sensitive! I wasn't putting you down. Congrats on being such a stud back in the day.

User avatar
Woodserson

Rank: XCD Guide
XCD Guide
Posts: 896
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2015 11:25 am
Location: New Hampshire

Re: Touring speed comparison of skinny dbl camber vs. fat fishscaled ski

Postby Woodserson » Tue Feb 20, 2018 10:42 pm

greatgt wrote:Went back and did the deed on The Gulf of Slides...then Tuckerman's....Those days it was 210 e99's....One women took her shirt off...Good God!....


LoooOOOoooOOOooooOOoooovvveee IT! YEAH!


Return to “Telemark Talk Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest