Blog Posts for 2008

Pete has asked me to contribute some thoughts on the art and science of ski design. Over the next few weeks I’ll post some advice, some data and some considerations regarding the design of custom skis.

Buying skis has become both easier and tougher than it was 20 years ago. Before 1990, there were about 35 ski factories around the world, and they all made essentially the same product. The design of skis had been more or less frozen for several decades. The classic slalom ski was 205cm for men and 190cm for women, shaped 85-65-75mm. This gave roughly a 40-meter sidecut radius and a bearing surface of about 1300 square centimeters. The classic giant slalom ski was 210cm for men and 200cm for women, shaped 87-68-77mm — roughly 50 meters radius and a bearing surface of 1400 square centimeters. The big differences in skis were not in shape and size, but in flex and materials. Slalom skis were of fiberglass, GS skis of aluminum. Recreational skis were thinner (therefore softer) and made of less-expensive materials. Buying skis required a lot of trial and error to find the flex pattern that worked for your weight, strength, skill and snow conditions.

Today most of that trial-and-error is gone. You can choose a ski based on matching width and turn radius to the kind of snow you like.

For hard snow, get a ski with a narrow waist: 67mm or narrower.

For soft groomers or general western front-of-mountain skiing, get a moderate waist — 68 to 74mm.

For resort powder (with a firm surface underneath) get a mid-fat waist, 75 to 80mm.

For deep snow (with an unpredictable base beneath) get a fat waist, over 80mm. If you’re big and heavy or carry a heavy pack, go even bigger: 90mm and up.

What remains is length and shape. Most men skiing at resorts can get along very nicely on a 165cm ski, most women on 155cm. If you’re stronger than average, go a bit longer but nowadays it won’t buy you a lot of additional stability. If you’re much lighter than average, go a bit shorter — it will pay off in improved agility.

Shape means sidecut. A deeper sidecut with a shorter radius carves a shorter turn. In general, this helps best on groomers. It won’t help in bumps, where you want the tail to release to avoid hanging up at the end of the turn. A good mid-fat nowadays has a shape close to 112-71-100, which gives a theoretical radius of about 12 meters and a bearing surface of 1300. Note that the bearing surface — the ski’s ability to “float” on soft snow — is similar to the classic straight slalom ski. So is the ski’s weight. But the agility — the ability to bend easily into a turn — is vastly improved due to a turn radius roughly 25% of the old long, straight ski.

So what should shape should you buy? Start with that “generic” 112-71-100mm shape at your length, then blow the waist up wider if you’re going to ski a lot of soft snow, and pull it in narrower if you’re going to ski a lot of hard snow. If you’re an expert who loves to carve, go for a shorter radius. If you want to be able to slide the tail a bit in bumps and tight woods (or if you have to skid a bit when you teach intermediates) opt for a bit narrower tail.

That’s the basics. Next time, I’ll consider the relationship between shape and flex pattern.

–Seth Masia
Vail Ski School

About 7 years ago I purchased a pair of skis that seemed perfect for me.  They received great reviews in the ski buyers guides.  I talked to people at ski shops who recommended them.  They were made by a respectable ski company.  I flexed them at a ski shop and thought they would be ideal for me.

Day one was a sunny February day and I got bucked around on my new planks.  It often takes some time to adjust to a ski and there is commonly a break-in period with skis.  After a week, I still wasn’t skiing my best, but was adapting to the skis.  After 30 days on them, I didn’t really think about them.  I was having fun skiing and my boards had been to great spots in the Colorado backcountry, as well as some world-class resorts.    I finished the season with close to 50 days on my skis.  It had been a good season.

The next December I demoed a pair of skis and was amazed.  I could ski with greater speed, on more aggressive lines, with greater agility, using less energy.  I found a pair of skis that fit me correctly and the results were clear and impressive.  My fitness level and skiing potential had been unleashed.

I had spent several years working in the golf industry as a product designer and engineer.  One aspect of my job was developing fitting systems for matching a person with their optimal equipment.  These fitting systems and custom-made clubs worked for golfers.  In the cycling world, people were also realizing great performance benefits of custom-fit bikes.  I realized that a scientific-based approach to fitting people with their optimal ski equipment could also create performance benefits for skiers.  The top world-cup racers get custom skis so they can ski their absolute best.  Why not create a system so that recreational skiers like myself won’t make the mistake of buying the wrong set of skis?    I liked the idea of simplifying the ski buying process.  So, I began studying ski design.  Several years later I founded Wagner Custom and I’m still studying ski design.

One thing that I’ve learned is that every skier is different and that one ski design won’t be perfect for everyone.   So, how does a skier identify what product is right for him or her?    There are many paths.  I suggest starting with information about ski design and ski construction.   To help with this process, I’d like to present some information on these topics.

Seth Masia, a ski equipment gear guru, has offered to help demystify ski equipment.  Seth began skiing on the glaciers above Chamonix in 1968. After ski-bumming in Colorado, he joined the staff of SKI Magazine in 1974 and was technical editor there for two decades. He served briefly as product manager for alpine skis at K2 Corp., where he helped to design the first generation of deep-sidecut skis. He has taught skiing for 25 years at Squaw Valley, Beaver Creek and, currently, in the Vail Village ski school. Seth is managing editor of Solar Today magazine, in Boulder, Colo. He skis on two pairs of Wagner Customs, both 166cm, 119-72-104mm — one pair fiberglass with a maple-ash core and one pair aluminum with a maple-aspen core.

In the coming weeks, Seth will be posting some guidelines about ski design, ski construction, and ski materials.  Thanks in advance, Seth, for sharing some of your insight.

Keep watching the Wagner Custom ski blog….

Available only through Winterstick.com, the first 2009 Winterstick boards are ready.  Wagner Custom worked closely with Winterstick rider/owner/designer Tom Burt to create the 2009 line-up that includes the legendary Swallowtail, ST 162, ST 166, and Tom Burt Pro 172 models.

If you’re looking for the ultimate powder snowboard (the Winterstick Swallowtail, of course) or a ride for steep big-mountain lines, do yourself a favor and check out the 2009 Winterstick snowboard line-up.

Winterstick snowboards are not available through shops.  However, you can buy them direct through the Winterstick.com store

I’m really excited that Tom Burt, big-mountain snowboarder icon, is now an owner/rider for Winterstick snowboards.  The Wagner Custom crew is going into its second year of designing and producing Winterstick boards.  Last season, we worked closely with Tom Burt to develop the 2009 line-up of Winterstick boards which are available now, exclusively through Winterstick.com.

Tom Burt is a great guy, incredible rider, and an invaluable asset for Winterstick snowboards.

Congratulations Tom!  I’m stoked to have the opportunity to work with you.

For more information, check out: Winterstick.com/news.php

AJ Linnell adjusts his Wagner Custom snowboard and approach skis on Denali's upper west ridge

I woke up on the morning of June 14th to temperatures well below zero, with frost caked around the hood of my sleeping bag and a layer of the stuff coating the inside of the tent walls. Every move brought a shower down from the ceiling. I could hear Jaime firing up the stoves in the cook Megamid while we blearily put on layer after layer of clothing and rammed our feet into frozen boot shells. The snow squeaked underfoot as we walked around camp, strapping snowboard and skis to our packs and donning harnesses that we wouldn’t remove until well past dinnertime. Looking up, I saw with apprehension a curl of spindrift blowing off the summit plateau, but the lower half of our climbing route was clear, and though the sun was hours away from us on the other side of the mountain I had a good feeling about what we would find once we got up on the Rib.

Mount Foraker in the background - AJ works towards Denali's summit

Juiced up on coffee and oatmeal, we walked out of 14-Camp and deeper into the shadow of the upper mountain, breaking trail through 20cm of fresh snow from the last few days’ flurries. We roped up to cross some bigger crevasses and work our way across the head of the glacier, arriving at the West Rib cutoff (16,200’) just as the sun hit the Russian team that was camped there. Looking down the lower Rib, it seemed like there could be some potential for a 7000’ snowboard/ski descent down to the Northeast Fork of the Kahiltna Glacier, but on another day, on a different trip. (First descent, possibly?) Our objective was to climb the Upper West Rib for 4000’ to the summit and then ride/ski the Messner Couloir back down to 14-Camp, 6000’ below.

(more…)