If waxing too impt, try a format that relies less on wax?

Talk about upcoming events

Moderator: Moderator Group

UPrSKr
xcskiforum 30K
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:05 am

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby UPrSKr » Sun Mar 20, 2016 4:00 pm

C:\Users\Ken\Pictures\2016-03-20\002-e.jpg
Attachments
002-e.jpg
002-e.jpg (23.91 KiB) Viewed 1105 times

MN Hoser
Ski Forum God
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 12:26 pm
Location: St. Paul, MN

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby MN Hoser » Mon Mar 21, 2016 7:52 pm

Ken, I'm curious what you think of that hfC15. Zach made it sound good, but I'm wonder if it living up to the hype. (I've thought about getting it.)

Jay

UPrSKr
xcskiforum 30K
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:05 am

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby UPrSKr » Mon Mar 21, 2016 8:28 pm

Jay, I used the Hfc15 a few times this year. It seemed to work well and is really easy to apply. I have also used the Hfc9 a few times. I used them mainly as a final topcoat, usually over the top of ironed on powder. I have also ironed them on instead of corking sometimes
. The Vauhti liquids are recommended for mainly new snow or old and new snow mixed. I would use C22 liquid or CM10 block for transformed snow. At the Great Bear Chase I used a pair of skis that were originally waxed with Swix HF6 70%/HF8 30% mix, covered with FC100 (cold ceraF) powder, covered with the Vauhti Hfc15. I used those skis at a 30km race at MTU back in January and hadn't used them since. They still looked good so I simply brushed them and reapplied another topcoat of Hfc 15 and ironed it in. The skis ran well, especially as the snow warmed in the second lap. The only problem is that these waxes are rather expensive, so I try to make them last as long as I can. I've really liked the SkiGo P16 powder mixed with high fluor waxes to increase durability. I see they also have a HFP16 powder now which might be worth trying. I finally re-waxed the skis shown above after another 50km of skiing today. I used LFgraphite/violet mix for base wax and covered them with P16/Holmenkol red mix. They will be for the cold mornings, and for warm weather I will use a warmer pair or zero classic skis. It will be rock skiing season here soon, so any waxing will be limited to durable base waxes and cheap rub on topcoats.
Ken

TooHeavy
xcskiforum 30K
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 4:06 pm
Location: Southern Ontario

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby TooHeavy » Tue Mar 22, 2016 5:30 pm

Curious UPrSKr you had a fast time for a older guy at the BirKie. How much slower would you have been on Hydro Carbon wax or Swix LF wax?

UPrSKr
xcskiforum 30K
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:05 am

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby UPrSKr » Tue Mar 22, 2016 7:41 pm

[quoteCurious UPrSKr you had a fast time for a older guy at the BirKie. How much slower would you have been on Hydro Carbon wax or Swix LF wax?][/quote]
That's a good question. Probably several minutes for sure, which might not seem like a lot, but I seriously doubt that there were very many if any skiers under 3hours that didn't use high fluor wax or even several layers of pure fluor this year. If I had to use LF wax it would probably would have been something like Toko Yellow or SkiGo yellow, which might have worked very well early on but would probably have slowed considerably after 20km of fairly wet snow with a fair amount of debris (dirt, pine needles, etc.) On the other hand, if it was cold with lower humidity, a non fluor wax like S-30, C380, P16, or a low fluor like LF4, could be very competitive if not faster. Even then, skiers such as myself, will often still use a cold powder cover such as Mid08 or HP06 because of improved durability with little if any speed liability, if not improved break away speed. Even for everyday skiing, I like to ski many km's before having to rewax, which means that durability is important to me, sometimes even at the expensive of giving up some initial speed. I also don't like waxing all that much, and even worse is the brushing. In order for a ski to be fast it needs to be brushed almost to the point of needing to be waxed again right away. It can become madness that never ends. In the end, it is most important to have good skis that I have confidence in, that is why I have several pairs of skis suited to different conditions and waxed for those conditions. My waxing goal is to try to keep it simple and wax for the averages. In fact I rarely ever wax skis at the last minute trying to hit a home run. The only waxing I did during Birkie week was cork on an additional topcoat of C22 liquid on the skis I planned to race on and brush out a couple other pairs as backup options. This was my 28th Birkie so I have used many different skis and many different waxes in many different conditions. I sure that there were races when I would have been faster had I not used fluor waxes, just like there were races in the early days when very few of us even heard of fluor waxes and were getting beat by skiers that were using them.

MN Hoser
Ski Forum God
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 12:26 pm
Location: St. Paul, MN

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby MN Hoser » Tue Mar 22, 2016 7:52 pm

Ken, thanks for the info on hfC15. I've looked at that and the C22, so it's interesting you used it at the Birkie. The skis I waxed for the guys was with C22 (powder), and I didn't cover with anything. It probably would have kept the ski cleaner to rub on something, but I just didn't think it would make much difference and brushing skis was getting me winded.

The guys liked their skis.

Jay

UPrSKr
xcskiforum 30K
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:05 am

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby UPrSKr » Tue Mar 22, 2016 8:33 pm

I ended up using my warmest skis, that were rilled and prepped with HF yellow and covered with C22 powder. I wasn't even going to bring them because they were clear base, but once I heard the forecast for rain, I figured the snow might transform enough. So I added the bigger rills because the existing rills were not great. That is the main reason to use the liquid C22 after rilling to ensure good coverage of the water repellant coat. I don't really know if it makes a huge difference. Those skis were about a ski length faster in the glide test on Friday than my black base Speedmaxes with a "D "grind, Solda F40 orange and Hfc9 topcoat. My other clear base Speedmaxes, prepped with HFyellow/P16 covered with CM10, were gliding about the same as my rilled skis. Karl W. outglided my best by about a ski length with a pair of older carbonlites with Swix HF8, Super CeraF, covered with Helix yellow, and a medium structure. He finished top 40 on those skies. So the moral of the story was that there were a number of good options, but the general consensus was high fluoros and warm skis on this particular day. Two days earlier, or a day later, and an entirely different combo would have been in play.

TooHeavy
xcskiforum 30K
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 4:06 pm
Location: Southern Ontario

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby TooHeavy » Wed Mar 23, 2016 12:32 pm

If you had to pick one block of fluro or one bottle of liquid to rub over a Hydro base or LF wax ,what would you buy to cover most conditions and get faster ski's ?

UPrSKr
xcskiforum 30K
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:05 am

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby UPrSKr » Wed Mar 23, 2016 3:58 pm

If you had to pick one block of fluro or one bottle of liquid to rub over a Hydro base or LF wax ,what would you buy to cover most conditions and get faster ski's ?


That's always a tough question because do you choose: (1) for the conditions you encounter most of the time, (2) for something to cover the broadest range of conditions, or (3) for something for conditions where fluoro would be the most effective?

When we first started skating around 1984, swix violet was pretty much the universal glide wax for me. A few years later a three wax system of Start green, Rex blue, and Swix cera F (over orange) was all that I needed to have pretty decent skis most of the time. Over the next 30 years, the whole waxing scene exploded into what it has now become with a myriad of possibilities, some amazingly good in the right conditions, and others not so much better than something cheap and simple.

I personally mainly use powders instead of blocks or liquids for the sake of durability and effectiveness, but if I had to choose an all purpose liquid for most conditions it would probably be the Vauhti Hfc15, although it is now reformulated into Hfc15.1 which I have not used and can't vouch for. If you wanted something primarily for wet conditions, the SkiGo C22 liquid would be a good choice. The SkiGo C22 block is supposed to be the most universal of the blocks and also effective in the critical wet and humid conditions. although personally I have not used it. Another good option that I have used would be the Solda power jet 1 block, which is a universal warm block that is effective in warm conditions, is reasonably priced,and lasts a long time.

It would be interesting to hear other opinions on this. Good luck.

UPrSKr
xcskiforum 30K
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Nov 28, 2007 7:05 am

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby UPrSKr » Thu Mar 24, 2016 3:19 pm

A nice thing about the block wax is ease of application. Today, I skied 50km or so on mainly snowmobile trails, and when I got home I brushed my skis, corked on some Solda power jet 5, brushed and polished, and the skis look ready to go. Not ideal, but much easier than a complete new wax job every 4 hours of skiing.

The advantage of fluorocarbon waxes in wet, humid, and problematic (zero) snow conditions has been pretty well accepted for many years now. But a little over 20 years or so ago, fluorocarbon waxes were being developed specifically for colder (Rex blue, Swix blue extra) conditions and used with great success in humid, broken down snow and especially in terms of breakaway speed. The traditional waxes felt good and were slippery at slow speeds but the fluorocarbon waxes were often much faster at race speeds. But they weren't (and still aren't) the total answer.

Back in 1996, I was warming up for the Red Earth Loppet at Blueberry Ridge near Marquette, Michigan. It was a nice sunny morning, mid teens or low twenties but felt much warmer in the March sunshine. But the humidity was low and the snow was very dry and powdery. About 10 minutes before the start of the race, Sten Fjeldheim skied past me like blazed lightning and said, "I pity anyone using fluorocarbon wax today!" I think I had something like Swix HF7 with cold ceraF powder on my skis. I immediately realized that I was screwed and sprinted back to the start area, ran to my truck, threw my new Fischer's in the back and grabbed an old pair of Karhu blues with nothing but Toko nordlite base wax on them. I ran to the start line with about a minute to spare. The race started, and my skis ran well. I passed Sten with about 2km to go, and finished about 20 seconds ahead of him. "Thank you, Sten". The lesson to be learned is that fluorocarbon waxes are not always the best choice, and in low humidity conditions an antistatic wax, like S-20 or even the nordlite, could be faster even in warmer conditions.
Attachments
011.JPG
011.JPG (42.41 KiB) Viewed 1029 times

MN Hoser
Ski Forum God
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 12:26 pm
Location: St. Paul, MN

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby MN Hoser » Sat Mar 26, 2016 6:40 am

I enjoy the stories. Keep 'em coming.

Jay

Chris
xcskiforum 40K
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2011 10:24 am

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby Chris » Sat Mar 26, 2016 8:43 am

TooHeavy wrote:If you had to pick one block of fluro or one bottle of liquid to rub over a Hydro base or LF wax ,what would you buy to cover most conditions and get faster ski's ?


C22 block. Besides the block being more universal, you should be able to get considerably more applications out of the block than the liquid.

TooHeavy
xcskiforum 30K
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 4:06 pm
Location: Southern Ontario

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby TooHeavy » Tue Mar 29, 2016 6:23 pm

After looking at most of these suggested Fluoro glide wax's on line they all seem to be in the plus temp range . What would you suggest from -2 down to -15 for good glide ?

User avatar
JeffOYB
Ski Forum God
Posts: 1140
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:44 pm
Location: Williamston, MI
Contact:

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby JeffOYB » Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:18 am

If brushing is a pain, why not roto-brush? I bought a cheap auto-supply nylon roto-type brush and have used it a couple times and plan on using it more. Seems like such things would save arm work. Isn't roto a standard nowadays?
Jeff Potter
http://OutYourBackDoor.com
indie outdoor adventure, culture, heritage
...bikes, boats, skis, luggage, media & more!

Blah
xcskiforum 40K
Posts: 350
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 8:43 am

Re: If waxing an issue for USST, format that uses less wax?

Postby Blah » Wed Apr 13, 2016 8:11 am

The standard is hand brushing. Roto can be way to aggressive


Return to “Races and Racing”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest