Volkl (Nordica) race tech quick questions

[hrstrat57]

Picked up a pair of FIS Racetigers on FBM this AM for $50. They’ve got Twice as much edge left as my current pair so I’ll keep these in reserve likely until mine give it up.

Oddly though the skis don’t have SL marker race plates and the plates are mounted significantly back from where they’re installed on my current pair (which ski incredible))

Tech thoughts on why you would install GS plates on 165 Volkl Racetigers and why mount them back towards the tail.

Pics will follow. Thanks in advance!

 

[hrstrat57]

Mods I thought it more likely I’d get the answers needed here in race forum vs gear forum as our race techs and USSA coaches are infinitely familiar with tweaking Marker Race plates... if you disagree move the thread.

Cheers

 

[Philpug]

Paging @ScotsSkier to the SkiTalk Courtesy Phone

 

[ScotsSkier]

@hrstrat57

There is not a separate slalom plate and GS plate. There are different mounting options for them depending on whether it is a GS or SL ski. That plate is the older (thicker) plate which may be why you think it is different. Marker changed the plate around 2010-11 to a thinner plate that is FIS height compliant. The newer plate is normally white or black depending on the vintage.

at that time also Volkls did not come with the plate factory mounted so it would have been installed by the shop/user. there are measurement for positioning the plate (measured from tail of ski IIRC) so there is always a possibility it was mounted wrong. Also if it is a different vintage ski there may have been a different mounting recommendation. You dont show a picture of etc full ski/topsheet but it looks like it is around 2011/12ish vintage. And of course one question, may be too obvious, but it is a slalom is and not a short GS sk???

 

[hrstrat57]

@scotskier same exact ski

I think mine are 08/09 and these are 09/10?

I’ll post pics of both graphics shortly and let you tell me

Both 165 13r

 

[hrstrat57]

 

[hrstrat57]

The new pair has the tiger graphic ^on the base otherwise same ski.

I bought the original pair off a USSA coach from CT who was original owner. Other than shimming the toe pieces with 1 Marker shim I did not change his set up. They ski incredible just a wee wiggle gets em turning yet they run stable flat within reason.

This pair was just bought from a fellow who got them 2nd hand.

As you can see I’ve already torn the newly acquired pair apart...

I’ll likely have some more questions regarding setting the raceplates up on the newly acquired pair after reading results of further analysis.

Is there a tech manual avail on the WWW from this era which would provide Volkl recommendations/measurements for installing the plates pictured? Linky?

Thanks!

 

[Philpug]

I would be scepticle with the M14.0, it is at least a decade old.

 

[hrstrat57]

I would be scepticle with the M14.0, it is at least a decade old.

Skid em 6 seasons ( tho I sat this season out) and always warm closet stored when not in use.

I’ll likely swap in some 16’s tho, I have 3 sets of those now and I’m told it’s a better binding...

 

[ScotsSkier]

@hrstrat57

it would be helpful if you posted some pictures of the FULL length of the skis showing the plates and positions. Hard to tell much when all your pictures are partial sections without identifying which is which!

Now you have triggered some distant memories that on the early plates there was a GS version and a slalom version. I dont remember them being different lengths but that is possible. On the newer plates (10/11 on) the actual plate is the same, the way it is mounted is slightly different. And of course since back then the skis came without a plate, which plate was fitted and where it was mounted could have been a complete crapshoot depending on what the owner had or which manual the shop read or even if they tried to mount at Boot center rather than measuring form the tail like they should. Simple answer, if you like the way your current one skis move the plate on the other one to match. Or, if your BSL is >295 or greater you could move the topiece forward to the front hole on the plate (there are 3 holes for the toe with 10mm spacing) and move the heel piece 2 holes forward which would bring you 20mm forward on the ski.

 

[hrstrat57]

@scotskier

Pic no 1 in post 2 shows how far back the plates are. The ski on the right with comp 16 toepiece is the new ski. My current ski has the plate marked SL and comp 14’s on the left. Pic 2 in post 2 shows my old ski on bottom with the thick plate marked SL. The new ski with thinner plate is above. I’ve removed the comp 16’s off the new skis.

Again the bases with the white tiger graphics are the new Racetigers. Top skins are identical on Both pair.

My pics are clear I think. My words rarely are lol!

I can dig all the stuff out for more pics if needed but above should clarify.

Thanks as always!

 

[François Pugh]

I think you mis-understood.
We would like to see one picture showing both skis from tip to tail. Topsides will do; we don't need to see the bases again.

 

[hrstrat57]

I’ll dig it all out again and shoot a full length side by side tomorrow.

Thanks!

 

[ScotsSkier]

I think you mis-understood.
We would like to see one picture showing both skis from tip to tail. Topsides will do; we don't need to see the bases again.

Bingo! that is the only way to compare!!!

 

[hrstrat57]

 

[S.H.]

I delaminated 5 pairs of this ski (despite the issues, still one of my favorites) back in ... 2009? My last two pairs are still in the rotation for race days (as a coach or official).

If I recall correctly (and I very well may not), the white tiger symbol on the base was for the "consumer" version of the ski that came with a system binding, and the all-black base was the "race stock" version (same dimensions and topsheet). It's possible that the previous owner stripped the system binding off the previous version (it wasn't that hard to do) and mounted a piston plate on top. I had to do this with the previous year's ski because Volkl ran out of "race stock" pairs in March. Skied pretty similarly. I could also be off on this, it's been a while.

As others have mentioned, this ski didn't come with a premounted piston plate, so you get the preferences (or availability) of the previous owner(s). If bought through a shop instead of through a rep, not all shops had/have great knowledge of race product. I know a lot of shops didn't have both the SL and GS plate, or would have many fewer of the SL plate and would mount GS plate instead and either (1) hope the user wouldn't know/notice or (2) make up for the height difference with shims. Some people would have lifters on their boot soles to get to the max stand height and would want the same plate on their SL and GS skis. I ran into this when I would get skis from a rep but was "on my own" for plates/bindings.

Those are also two different generations of plate. The pair with the Comp14s have the older style plate, and the others (the "new" pair?) have a newer (but still pre-XCell) version.

Further back ... binding placement is pretty personal, as I'm sure you know. Could be anything there.

 

[hrstrat57]

Thx @S.H.

You do know your Racetigers and make em sing and snarl like nobody’s business too!

It’s quite possible the coach I bought pair on the right from had a stock of older race plates that didn’t line up with model year. Pretty sure you’re right and that’s a 2006 plate on a 2009 ski. iIRC you are pretty famous for rocking comp 16’s on your newer xCell raceplates?

I’m thinking along @scotskier line mount farthest forward, shim the toe and have at it. Doubtful I’m good enuff to notice the difference. If it ends up tailgunner city I can just move the plate using some common holes as reference.

My kid will likely end up with em eventually anyway he loves my hand me down Volkl’s!

 

[François Pugh]

Just thinking out loud.
The plate placement further back would slightly alter the flex pattern of the ski, just a bit by making the tails a bit stiffer and the tips a bit softer (considering what a bending moment diagram would look like for that compound beam). Even if you could mount your boots in the same place, that would end up with easier to bend/engage tips and harder push off from the tails. However, it looks like your boots will also need to be a bit more rearward, so a bit harder to load up the tips (compensating effect), and more weight on the tails. On the plus side, if you're racing your buddies down the hill you won't be bruising the snow as much and should have an advantage, if you can access the front well enough.

 

[hrstrat57]

Just thinking out loud.
The plate placement further back would slightly alter the flex pattern of the ski, just a bit by making the tails a bit stiffer and the tips a bit softer (considering what a bending moment diagram would look like for that compound beam). Even if you could mount your boots in the same place, that would end up with easier to bend/engage tips and harder push off from the tails. However, it looks like your boots will also need to be a bit more rearward, so a bit harder to load up the tips (compensating effect), and more weight on the tails. On the plus side, if you're racing your buddies down the hill you won't be bruising the snow as much and should have an advantage, if you can access the front well enough.

Yep lotta geometry and physics at play here. Let’s not forget the increased stand height and the toe shims tweaking the delta. The current pair turn with just a little pressure yet they run like crazy. I recall noticing a dramatic difference after I added the shim and went one hole forward. But of course the older I get the better I used to be...

I’d still like to know what Volkl /Marker recommend for mounting the plate for the model year of these skis....

 

[James]

If you have two pairs of Comp 16’s in the closet, remove the 14’s with their plastic toe wings and mount the 16’s.