Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums - Reply to Topic
Thread: What if I Don't Wax... Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 
   

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Snowboarding Forum - Snowboard Enthusiast Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
03-17-2016 09:51 PM
Craig51
wax

Quote:
Originally Posted by bksdds View Post
Reading this thread made me think about the oil forums I used to read to kill time.

All temp vs All temp Lo Fluoro vs no wax. Discuss!
I use low fluro Hertal FC739 all the time as the cost difference is so minuscule when calculating usage per board wax.
03-17-2016 08:32 PM
bksdds Reading this thread made me think about the oil forums I used to read to kill time.

All temp vs All temp Lo Fluoro vs no wax. Discuss!
03-13-2016 04:05 PM
DaftDeft
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fielding View Post
Also, dude's thesis relies on lab tests but not on actual skis to the snow tests. I wonder why not? To be fair, there's a whole mess of variables out there on the real slopes that would be hard to control for. I can see where science dudes might rather not do real life tests. But still. My interest is not in pure science but rather in gliding better.
That's the whole point of lab tests: isolate a single factor in a complex system and explore the boundaries of that particular thing. People everyday are doing "field tests" so this guy seems like he wanted to explore the specific mechanics of glide and how base preparation affects gliding performance.

The experiment isn't meant to say: this is always make you glide faster in any conditions! But rather to present evidence based conclusions about the sort of things that will make ski/snowboards faster and more durable with the hope that manufacturers will pick up on the data presented and alter board designs. Also experts may find the conclusions of interest and introduce new base preparation procedures.

Its something worth exploring I'd think, assuming this guy is even pursuing it anymore.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fielding View Post
But for how long? In what conditions? What happens when you start getting grooves and cuts in your perfect base? My guess is that things stop being so hydrophobic/low friction down there.
Great questions and that would be a few papers to answer the first one, a couple more on the second one, a half dozen for the third one to explore all types of damage. Its a short publishing career right there! He should have the answers 10 million dollars and 10 years later. (Scholars gotta make bank somehow)
03-13-2016 11:07 AM
Wiredsport That article has some mighty funny reasoning.
03-13-2016 09:12 AM
Fielding
Quote:
Originally Posted by shitty shredder View Post
I think unless you've steel scraped a snowboard base, the conclusion does jive with your experience.
According to dude's thesis, steel scraped, unwaxed skis are most hydrophobic and have least friction (and therefore should be faster?!?). I have never ridden a steel scraped board or skis. So I'll recognize the possibility that it's super-titties. But for how long? In what conditions? What happens when you start getting grooves and cuts in your perfect base? My guess is that things stop being so hydrophobic/low friction down there.

Also, dude's thesis relies on lab tests but not on actual skis to the snow tests. I wonder why not? To be fair, there's a whole mess of variables out there on the real slopes that would be hard to control for. I can see where science dudes might rather not do real life tests. But still. My interest is not in pure science but rather in gliding better.

Here's a test I did in Montana a few years back. (OK, it wasn't really a test because I didn't intend to do anything more than ride.) I went out in -10 F weather. There was fresh snow that had fallen the night before. We got maybe 10 inches. Then the temp started dropping. It dropped from 20 F well into the negatives by morning. I was one of the first people to get to the mountain. I had a board that was poorly waxed with whatever all temp stuff I had on hand maybe 4 or 5 riding days before this one. When I pointed it downhill it felt like I was glued to the mountain! The snow felt like rubber. My board chirped and squeaked as it moved over the snow. It was very difficult to acquire speed. I could barely make it down one run. When I got to the base, at the suggestion of a friend, I went to the shop and had them wax my board with a cold temp wax. 30 minutes later I was sliding right.
03-12-2016 09:10 PM
shitty shredder
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fielding View Post
Frankly, the conclusion of the paper doesn't jive with my experience. But it's still interesting as a motherfucker, right? Some folks have put a lot of thought into wax. It might be voodoo magic, but I'm a believer. I like the way it smells when I'm waxing.
I think unless you've steel scraped a snowboard base, the conclusion does jive with your experience.
03-12-2016 08:39 PM
Fielding Frankly, the conclusion of the paper doesn't jive with my experience. But it's still interesting as a motherfucker, right? Some folks have put a lot of thought into wax. It might be voodoo magic, but I'm a believer. I like the way it smells when I'm waxing.
03-12-2016 08:37 PM
shitty shredder
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaftDeft View Post
That's pretty interesting and also a 2006 paper so its not like its new information. I wonder why the whole industry didn't stop selling its millions of dollars worth of useless products... oh right.

Paper tl;dr: Stone Grinding your skis/snowboard destroys the base and makes it slower. Waxing makes your board slower than a dry board.

Paper was a survey paper and didn't do any experimentation itself. Didn't back track but I'll guess the author worked on previous publications as well that established the two main points.
It still seems that for some bases that have been stoneground, they do benefit from wax (because of SG damage). But steel scraping + dry board is always better, except for expensive high fluoro racing wax, which starts out better and then becomes worse than not waxing at all after a couple days worth of runs.

Easier to digest summary:
http://www.kuzmin.se/docs/presentati...owax_en-en.pdf
03-12-2016 08:01 PM
Trabi75 Freshly waxed board this morning. Seemed pretty quick. Too bad I made a bonehead mistake on a badly groomed run and hit the deck at 58. Separated my collar bone. Guess I shouldn't have waxed.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk
03-12-2016 08:00 PM
shitty shredder
Quote:
Originally Posted by poopresearch View Post
Haha! You mean we are both right? There aren't pores but wax is critical for abrasion protection? Let's all hug.
Nope, better read it again. Wax hurts abrasion protection! UHMWPE is far harder than any wax.

Page 10:

Quote:
Conclusion 2 The ski base material UHMWPE is many times more abrasion resistant than any ski glide waxes available today. Accordingly, the idea that glide wax application protects the ski base from abrasion is clearly absurd.
Another experiment testing hardness before and after a wax bath, showing that the base material becomes weaker (doesn't explain why, though):

http://www.kuzmin.se/docs/isea2008_presentation.pdf
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome