I like the dig at Bode there at the end
Yep, well done.
But metal doesn't make a ski stiff? Not even when it's the top and bottom layers in a composite, aka. I-beam? Ti is a 7000 series of Al. Is all that tensile strength going to waste?
I like the dig at Bode there at the end
Titanal in a ski won’t effect longitudinal stiffness
You can run a partial sheet in the Center of the ski to improve dampening and it will have less effect on torsional rigidity vs having the outer frame of metal along the edges of the ski like Volkl uses on the Kendo 88/Mantra/Katana likes and K2 Mindbender.
That’s why anyone who knows anything about ski building will tell you taking a round circle of metal out of the top titanal layer will do nothing for longitudinal stiffness and be unnoticeable on torsional stiffness too.
Are there any skis with the exact same layup except add metal?This is not true. If you add titanal to any layup you will increase its longitudinal stiffness.
Are there any skis with the exact same layup except add metal?
They are all important factors and this is exactly why we measure the fundamental properties of the skis out there. Just listing the material used is not that useful. The snow doesn't care that you use metal, a maple core or carbon fibre. What is important is that the ski deflect a certain way under load, and that is determined mostly by its shape, bending & torsional stiffnesses and mass properties. You can use many different material & constructions, but if you keep these the same I guarantee that the skis won't feel too different...Kind of makes you wonder if core material and thickness is better determinant of flex and feel of ski versus it having metal or not. There are so many light skis with metal today and they don’t really ski like the metal skis of yester-year. More like the metal is somewhat offsetting the use of thin/light wood core material but not delivering the feel ((dampness, suspension or whatever you want to call it).
Recent example for me was a few runs on my son’s J Skis Allplay skis (184 cm). Maple wood core with carbon/fiberglass and around 2000 grams per ski. The center mount and rounded edges from all the park stuff wasn’t my taste but what struck me was how smooth and calm they felt going fast through junky snow. Like a ski with metal but in this case likely from a heavier/denser wood and thicker core.
So the use of metal doesn’t necessarily make a ski stiff. That’s the point I think. Most people assume metal means stiff skis.I am sure there are, but it is really hard to say by just looking at the measurements. But it is true that if you add metal you would probably also adjust the layup. However, you can adjust the layup to change or not the longitudinal & torsional stiffness. You can really do whatever you want.
Yeah, but is it really longer to say that you can make a ski as stiff or soft as you want with any material instead of saying "Metal does not make a ski stiffer"?!?So the use of metal doesn’t necessarily make a ski stiff. That’s the point I think. Most people assume metal means stiff skis.
No, started measuring around 2015...Got any specs on 1st gen Kastle FX 84, 94? Those had 2 thin sheets, not very stiff. I think that was 2013 or earlier.
How much do you think that the exact same build varies in stiffness. I.E., between different skis of the sane model/size. Wondering how much range one could get in stiffness just randomly.
Lots of skis out there with similar construction in a lineup with metal and non metal options.
Remember the k2 Ikonic models that had very similar builds. Ti versions blending some lighter woods to keep weight down and non metal versions blending some heavier wood to try and dampen them a bit. The longitudinal flex was almost exactly the same, yet torsional rigidity WAY up and overall weight higher in the Ti versions.
Current Rossignol Experience line has Ti and Basalt options with that are otherwise the same construction. The Basalt versions are stiffer longitudinal and Ti versions again stiffer torsionally and a bit heavier.
Faction in the 22 CT line and the 22 Santa Ana both went the opposite way taking metal away from those designs. Faction dropped two sheets of metal underfoot found in the 21 versions and added carbon fibre weaves throughout the ski in 22 keeping the rest of the design the same. The latest skis are now stiffer longitudinal and softer torsionally where the metal sections used to be on the 21 version.
The 22 Santa Ana went from 2 full sheets of metal in earlier versions like the Enforcers line to only 1 partial width sheet of metal tip to tail with no core changes. Both the longitudinal and torsional stiffness changed very little on the latest version and only the weight dropped. The on-snow feel would be different of course with the weight drop.
So taking out a single hole in one continuous sheet of metal and changing nothing else will save about 15gr per ski and that’s about it. Lol
An increase in stiffness comes from a higher second moment of inertia (I) due to the ski being slightly thicker due to the thickness of the metal. The increase in longitudinal stiffness due to the metal is marginal (as I note at 0:55s) compared to the increase in torsional stiffness and weight increase (which lowers the natural frequency and further aids in making a ski 'feel' stiffer). Does it make it stiffer on a mathematical level? Yes. Does it matter in comparison to the other factors that a human brain can detect? Nope.This is not true. If you add titanal to any layup you will increase its longitudinal stiffness.
An increase in stiffness comes from a higher second moment of inertia (I) due to the ski being slightly thicker due to the thickness of the metal.
Yes sir! My son has the “Bob Ross” graphic and he gets more attention and hoots than Beyonce! Personally, I’m a sucker for retro, wood grain, or all Black or White graphics.A cool graphic will change how a person perceives a ski more than anything. Just ask JSkis.
Non engineer (and not the smartest person) here. Please tell me if I understand this titanal issue using the following example.
The Fischer RC1 86 GT is pretty much known as a "big boy" ski and the reason for that (so I hear) is that it has two layers of .08 titanal. Further, it is often referred to as "Race Room" titanal. In other words, this is mega titanal and you had better bring your "A" game if you dare to try it.
But, in reality, titanal is nothing more than aluminum, it's floppy, and it does nothing to increase the overall stiffness of the ski. All it does is make the ski heavier and the increase in weight gives you a false sense of stiffness. Do I have that right?
This is going to affect some people as learning the truth about Santa Claus. I can't wait to go into a ski shop and the salesperson tells me that "these skis don't have just one, but TWO sheets of titanal. This baby is a BEAST!"
Hmmm well..... We need to talk".
Pretty much nonsense. There’s no such thing as “race room titanal”. The aluminum alloy sheet trademarked Titanal and made by AMAG comes in different thicknesses. You can pick which ever. There’s a reason race skis use metal, but I doubt any current consumer available gs race ski approaches the stiffness of the race skis of the straight ski era that had no metal.Further, it is often referred to as "Race Room" titanal. In other words, this is mega titanal and you had better bring your "A" game if you dare to try it.
Well it is more than just aluminum, it’s an aluminum alloy. It’s a bit like walking up to an airplane and saying, “that’s nothing more than aluminum”. (You can make airplanes out of wood too)But, in reality, titanal is nothing more than aluminum, it's floppy, and it does nothing to increase the overall stiffness of the ski. All it does is make the ski heavier and the increase in weight gives you a false sense of stiffness.
Just go demo it, even if you have your B game that day.
...
Even big airplanes can be made of wood!