The World Cup trip wrapped up very well from my point of view. Last weekend was a good one for the USST. Newell’s fourth place in the sprint and Kris’s 5th in the 15K classic were great to see. I’ve been frustrated often enough just hearing the reports back here on how things are going. Kris has always been able to tell me what he’s skiing on, and sometimes he’s even been able to mention some waxes that were in play. But often I’ve just been confused and out of the loop. Confused because the limited information that I’ve got doesn’t make sense, and out of the loop because I’m here, not there. This trip tied a lot of stuff together for me, and also provided a really good framework for working with the USST World Cup service staff.It was reassuring on Sunday to see that the grind work I’m doing is good enough for a top-five in a World Cup. There is no issue of quality involved, but some of the structures I’ve come to rely on back home simply didn’t work over there. I had some encouraging feelings from the C40 on one or two cold days, but by and large the TF02 was running the best of the grinds I had on the snow over there. If I were trying to develop grinds specific to the venues and conditions I’ve just seen, I would be starting over. Fortunately, that’s not my job. I’m supposed to be developing structures for the Callaghan Valley, and although I’m starting over, I’ve got two years and good collaborators to work with.
Kris raced the 15K Sunday on his 649 ski - a Fischer 812 with a high, active pocket and a soft, flat finish. The grind (TF02) was good enough to stay out of the way of the right ski. And that’s been it’s reputation over there. Lars has told me that if you could only make one grind the TF02 would be the one to have. I can see why now.
When we first started testing in Kuusamo the temps were pretty warm. In early paraffin tests the Ski*Go HF yellow/blue combination was running best. But then it got colder, and by race days we were on straight HF blue for the sprint, and then an HF Start green for the 15K. Although the temperature was about -16C by Sunday, there was really no question of whether pure fluoros were in play. They’re always in play. That seems to be another major difference between North America and Europe. Over there it’s very rare to race on paraffins. Over here we do it frequently.
OK - so that wasn’t much of an objective testing report. Just some observations. In the next little while I’ll be working on getting to know the Callaghan Valley venue, zeroing out my test fleet, and starting systematic testing of structures. The next couple of years will be a big change for me. In the past I’ve always been very open with the specifics of my development process. I’ve shared information and grind formulas quite openly. Now I’ve got an exclusive contract to develop structures for the USST, and I won’t be at liberty to share information in the same way. I’ll start by testing basic linear frequencies and simple variables. But that information is the foundation upon which subsequent developments will be made. I’ll be posting plenty of information on testing, but it won’t be as comprehensive as what I’ve provided in the past.
4 responses so far ↓
1 Charlie Anderson // Dec 6, 2007 at 9:00 am
Zach,
I’ve been following your adventures and have been enjoying the posts. It seems there is a dramatic difference in what works in Europe vs. your expectations. Question: Do you think the factory finishes are only optimized for Europe and so when they are over here, everyone says they are too aggressive?
2 slowerskier // Dec 6, 2007 at 9:11 am
Zach,
Thanks for the report, exactly what I’d hoped to read. Please clarify: “HF blue for the sprint, and then an HF Start green for the 15K…there was really no question of whether pure fluoros were in play. They’re always in play.”
Therefore which pure fluoros were used? (You arent calling HF Start Green a “pure fluoro”?)
Further:”That seems to be another major difference between North America and Europe. Over there it’s very rare to race on paraffins. Over here we do it frequently.”
You mean for example the euros might race on CH4, when the American skiers are on CH4 + LF4 + HF4 + BD4 + ski*go vial of speed-crack + toko aerosol PTFE spray + speed drops ? Or did you just mean CH4 vs HF4 ? Thanks.
Superb results in every way for you & US Nordic (so far!). Great to have momentum this year.
3 Zach Caldwell // Dec 6, 2007 at 9:35 am
Charlie - The big question is whether factory finishes can be considered “optimized” to start with. By and large the grinding on a pair of production skis is done in an automated process with a limited number of passes over a stone. That means that each pass needs to do a lot of work toward flattening, polishing and putting final structure on the ski. What I (or other “aftermarket” grinders) do in about ten or fifteen passes over the stone, the factory is trying to do in three or four passes. The result is a base that is significantly hardened, and is quite unforgiving until it’s been waxed a bunch.
In addition, it’s important to bear in mind that the factory production finish is NOT what might be raced-on in a World Cup event. Each company has it’s own race department, and they’re all grinding skis for use by top level racers. For instance, Kris Freeman and Kikkan Randall both tested skis this past week with “factory” grinds from Fischer, and Kikkan raced on hers. But these are not the same as the production grinds that you’ll find in the local ski shop. They’re made by service technicians in the race-room, not in an automated production process.
My personal feeling is that Fischer has done a great deal to try to emulate their World Cup grinds on their production skis. They’ve put in an impressive line-up of Mantec machines which the ski pass through in series - all automated. Nathan Schultz visited the factory in October and described the process with no small amount of admiration. Of all the companies I would say that Fischer is the least concerned with what their skis look like in the showroom, and most concerned with what they feel like on the snow. They’re the first company to put skis on the retail floor with a full layer of factory-applied wax on them. They’re the only brand that I consider “race-ready” as you find them in the store.
In my opinion, most of the other brands are going for “optics” first and performance second. I’m sure I’ll take some heat for this - but there it is.
Dell - By “pure fluoros” I mean pure fluoros. I don’t really know whether Larry considers his wax choices confidential, but without his permission I’m not going to start publicly posting what’s going on final layers for the race skis.
My point about the difference between Europe and North America is that it’s quite common for us, here in North America, to race at a high level of paraffins - often with very low additive content. In Europe it’s much more rare NOT to use a pure fluoro top-coat.
4 donpollari // Dec 7, 2007 at 8:25 am
Zach,
congratulations and thanks for providing a peek into what’s going on at the elite level.
With the humid conditions and big structures that seem to work over there, were you doing any hand rilling?
Leave a Comment