Forums Splitboard Talk Forum Waxless Base Splitboard Viewing 10 posts - 21 through 30 (of 30 total) ← 1 2 Author Posts December 22, 2013 at 12:41 am #673167 iriecoyote 291 Posts Hey Matt a.d., I’ve been working on skating but finding it stupid hard w/ a rocker board. Are you on a cam board? powslash, kicker skins may be the right compromise but you’ll still get less glide than scales. I understand the intended purpose of kicker skins to be for XC ski touring when things get a little steeper than your scales or kick wax will allow rather than for going far on flat terrain. I hear ya on not wanting to slow the board down but maybe you’ll be pointing it straight more and looking more manly to boot? Har. More seriously I see scales as a compromise and definitely a quiver board for those days that have a long, flattish approach. December 23, 2013 at 3:09 am #673168 Chair2BoardSports 62 Posts We went out with Matt from Voile (in house sales rep) up at the mt baker splitfest. He had exactly what you are describing, a split with fish scales right under foot. Iirc it was a full camber board, but I would have to verify that. It was a cool concept and they built it literally just to see how it worked. He said that in the right terrain, with the right snow, and the right weather, it was awesome. Anything other than that and it was miserable! He had a really tough time at baker that day (wet snow, lots of steep ascents) but knew it wasn’t the right tool for the day. We thought about trying to use x country kick wax to see how that would do, but we have too many steep ascents with very little flat traversing. I always thought about just using the wrong wax for the snow in the middle of the board so snow would stick to the base and not allow it to glide. I just dont want to waste a day in the backcountry to try it haha December 23, 2013 at 5:08 am #673169 HansGLudwig 601 Posts It’s not base texture that will make this work, it’s profile. You’ll need a board a double camber, tuned to your exact weight (including clothes, pack, water &c.) Normal skis and boards have a ‘single’ camber (one arc when viewed from the side) which spring-loads energy into the snow when weighted. At that point the base is flat. XC skis have a “double camber,” meaning there is the ‘normal’ camber arch, and an arch on top of that. When the ski is partially weighted, most of the base is flat except underfoot (where the second arch is), hiding the scales (or grippy wax) and letting the sliding wax do it’s thing. Only when most of your weight is on one ski (unweighting the other) does the second camber flatten out, exposing the scales (or grippy wax). Check out this pic. The gal on the left has her weight evenly distributed on both skis— not exposing the scales/wax— allowing her to glide. The gal on the right has her right ski fully weighted (grip engaged) allowing the other to glide. **So long as you have a single cambered board, you’ll have your grip (scales/wax/mohair inserts) engaged, causing friction and slowing you down; weighted or not.** Compare the sheer wood underfoot between a XC ski v snowboard. This is the underside of the underfoot portion of an XC ski. (3-5 cm vs. 1 cm) All that yellow is sidewall. That’s b/c skis need the extra material to resist half your weight, but flex under all your weight. Snowboards don’t have near enough meat underfoot to counteract your weight and have some camber leftover. Besides, lifting the board the between bindings (in ride mode) off the snow would take away your primary edge for turning in hard snow. Further, where snowboard bindings are mounted vis a vis the arch, it is impossible to weight a double cambered arch enough to completely flatten out and hold the edge. For rolling terrain, your better off getting super glidey skins (G3 Alpinist?) and nordic technique-ing your heart out. Or ski your board with the smooth edge inward, and get good at the “herring bone”/skate-ski technique. Be sure to bookmark Splitboard.com's Recent Activity page... http://splitboard.com/activity-2/ December 23, 2013 at 4:33 pm #673170 Zude 367 Posts I’ve skied “bc fish scale” skis for years and their great for rolling mellow terrain. Kicker skins are a must for any sort of steepish terrain (20+ degrees). I would love to see someone rig up some max glide kicker skins for splits. Only drawback being you have to carry both pairs of skins for when it getts steep. Be nice to be able to rip them quick and easy then stuff them in a pocket. December 28, 2013 at 3:19 am #673171 chamstew 29 Posts Why not just use some hard wax (aka kick wax) to achieve the same result as you would get from having a waxless base? I’ve been doing this for years in the Northeast, where long approaches on “rolling” terrain is typical when accessing most backcountry zones. Apply the desired amount of wax and buff with a cork, covering only the kick zone (and area slightly longer than your boot). It takes some getting used to, especially if you’re not a Nordic skier, but its well worth the effort. And you can fly on the downhills. If you stick to the harder waxes (blue and green), you’ll have no problem removing the wax with a metal scraper before attaching your skins for the steeper climbs or before you start your descent, especially if your board has been hot waxed recently. http://www.rei.com/product/454021/swix-hard-wax-45-grams,-blue-extra?preferredSku=4540217009&cm_mmc=cse_PLA-_-pla-_-product-_-4540217009&mr:trackingCode=3C79B337-75FA-E011-9A77-001B21631C34&mr:referralID=NA&mr:device=c&mr:adType=pla&mr:ad=36518307280&mr:keyword=&mr:match=&mr:filter=39033340480&msid=6kJ4qFrE_dc%7Cpcrid%7C36518307280%7C&%7Bcopy:s_kwcid%7D December 28, 2013 at 4:15 am #673172 Powder_Rider 498 Posts Why not just use some hard wax (aka kick wax) to achieve the same result as you would get from having a waxless base? I do not want to carry kick wax and take the time to scrape the wax off off skins and skis. What I really need a waxless split-ski is for the long tours (7 Miles avg.) to 10th Mountain Huts on low angle Forest Service Roads and low angle trails in spring-time conditions, which means a softer kick-wax. It would be a lot simpler to use an appropriate-sized waxless base split-ski (AKA Keep it simple) and skins for the steeps. Concerning Double Camber: I think a single camber (rocker-camber) will suffice, as I not trying to go nordic on a splitboard. Just need just enough waxless base to tour on rolling terrain. So I not looking for a lot of glide, just more than my split-skins touring on rolling terrain. Concerning Kicker Skins: I am going to make a couple of pair of Kicker Skins, similar to this; See “Thin-Skins” post http://splitboard.com/talk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=16321 December 28, 2013 at 2:58 pm #673173 shredgnar 643 Posts My wife demoed some waxless based Voile Vector bc skis this week. Her conclusion, great for the up, bad for the out. Too much drag. I was way ahead of her on the way out of a logging road on my AT skis (if I was not such a great husband and not waited for her, I could have been two miles ahead of her on a three mile road). On a splitboard, this would be even worse, because you would have even more drag in the flats and low angle stuff that you came in on. Anything that you could climb with these would not be worth riding, especially with the amount of drag you would have on the descent. You couldn’t even skate the flats in board mode, you’d have to switch back over. You couldn’t enjoy any low angle turns, it would have to be pretty steep, but you could only skin up low angle stuff. But I hope someone tries it and proves me wrong. December 28, 2013 at 5:43 pm #673174 Powder_Rider 498 Posts Shredgnar posted: My wife demoed some waxless based Voile Vector bc skis this week… . Youré wife demoing the Vector Skis is quite relevant to this post: Her conclusion, great for the up, bad for the out. Too much drag. I was way ahead of her on the way out of a logging road on my AT skis (if I was not such a great husband and not waited for her, I could have been two miles ahead of her on a three mile road). On a splitboard, this would be even worse, because you would have even more drag in the flats and low angle stuff that you came in on. Anything that you could climb with these would not be worth riding, especially with the amount of drag you would have on the descent. You couldn’t even skate the flats in board mode, you’d have to switch back over. You couldn’t enjoy any low angle turns, it would have to be pretty steep, but you could only skin up low angle stuff. Would applying the waxless glide wax have helped the Vector BC Skis? Example of rolling terrain I am referring to: On the the way out of Peter Estin hut, we choose to the low-angle fire road back to the trail head. The route was 4500 drop in elevation over seven miles. However it was rolling terrain. It was frustrating to try to glide without skins in fresh snow, so the skins had to remain on. Hence a long slog out to the trailhead. This is where a just the right amount of waxless base would have helped. So what I am looking for is to narrow and shorten the waxless kick-zone pocket . Hence just enough waxless pattern to maintain a forward momentum in low-angle rolling terrain and not impede glide, skating or turning down hill. I don’t really care about riding switch. So hopefully a splitboard manufacture like Voile (and others) would be willing to refine the waxless kick zone pocket. It’s going to take some R&D to get it right (many splitboards / BC skis) Sad to hear the Vector BC did not work. I know that the waxless base pattern has been refined over the year’s; since Trak first strapped a Fish to a competitors skis at a trade show back in the early eighties (introducing their waxless cross country ski). December 29, 2013 at 2:36 am #673175 Spencer 128 Posts IIRC when telemarktips.com was in business the waxless ski debate always ended up with the coastal moderate temperature guys who face a wide range of conditions in a single day (hour?) in favor of them (or at least grudgingly accepting their versatility) and the very cold weather or inland powder types opposed. And of course the wax snobs fulminating in the corner. For splits, I cant see it around here (NH) but when I see pics or video of some of the approaches elsewhere…. January 1, 2014 at 4:48 am #673176 nordicbordn 225 Posts seems weird. i dont wax my split anyways, Viewing 10 posts - 21 through 30 (of 30 total) ← 1 2 You must be logged in to reply to this topic.