flex number on skis
nnn
There is a hand written number on the tag of some Fischer SCS skis(193cm,
stiff) that I was looking at. The number is 100.1. Is that a flex number?
How do I interpret that? For comparison, I looked at a pair of Fischer RCS
skis(197cm, stiff), and the handwritten number was 114.8. I'm 6'3, 220lbs.
thanks, tom
nnn
I forgot to say that I had a salesman perform a paper test on the Fischer
SCS skis(193cm, stiff). With my weight evenly balanced on both skis, the
paper would slide out from under my feet. However, with all my weight on
one ski, the paper was firmly clamped to the floor.
Gene Goldenfeld
stiffs are created equal. If the paper didn't slide at all, then the
ski is too soft for general usage, but possibly good for soft, new snow
conditions. Zach Caldwell's website doesn't explain the paper test, but
it does give a good idea of the relationship between stiffness and flex
characteristics.
gr...@gtfangel.com
That number should relate to the kg weight of the skier for the pair of
skis. 100.1 x 2.2 = 220.2#. You should still do the paper test to size
the skis correctly. Some skis are marked with the kg weight for one
ski.
Greg Fangel
nnn
> That number should relate to the kg weight of the skier for the pair of
> skis. 100.1 x 2.2 = 220.2#. You should still do the paper test to size
> the skis correctly.
Is that handwritten number the weight that closes the camber completely?
Should that number be higher than 100% of my body weight.
What should the results of the paper test be?
>Some skis are marked with the kg weight for one
> ski.
Yes, the skis I saw only had one ski of the pair marked with the hand
written number.
<gr...@gtfangel.com> wrote in message
news:1109762161.8...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Marc Gwadz
recommends that the measured flex by 110-130% of ski body weight.
so, for your weight that would suggest skis with flex of 110-130kg.
which is why the eagle river guy told me that i'd need to get the RCS to
find a ski for my weight (~200lbs). i went with cheaper and sup-optimal
(SCS at 98kg rated flex, 108% body weight. i should just lose a couple
lbs...)
-marc
Camilo
you?
By the way, the paper test involves more than just seeing if the paper will
slide out w/ half weight and get stuck with full weight. Hopefully, the guy
did more than that.
nnn
to
> you?
None of the people at my local shops know anything about flex fitting skis
to customers. I am the one that has to ask them to help me in these strange
experiments.
"Camilo" <campa...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:38md09F...@individual.net...
What more can be done if the paper is trapped between the ski and the floor
at full body weight?
nnn
> according to the sticker that came on my fischer SCS skis, fischer
> recommends that the measured flex by 110-130% of ski body weight.
>
Thanks for that information. My sticker just has a bar code, the ski name
and length, and the hand written 100.1 on it. What about other
manufacturers? Do ski shops have to measure that number themselves?
> so, for your weight that would suggest skis with flex of 110-130kg.
>
> which is why the eagle river guy told me that i'd need to get the RCS to
> find a ski for my weight (~200lbs).
>
I've located a Fishcer RCS 197cm, stiff with a flex number of 117, but it's
twice as much as the Fischer SCS pair I was thinking about buying.
>i went with cheaper and sup-optimal
> (SCS at 98kg rated flex, 108% body weight. i should just lose a couple
> lbs...)
>
How are they working out?
end
=========
Camilo
"nnn" <nord...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:38mn57F...@individual.net...
> > Couldn't the guy who was helping you and did the paper test explain this
> to
> > you?
>
> None of the people at my local shops know anything about flex fitting skis
> to customers. I am the one that has to ask them to help me in these
strange
> experiments.
You're in a tough position. If I were in your position - having a local
source without any expertise, I'd go mail order from a company with a good
reputation and expertise in fitting skis via mail order. I've never done it
because I have local sources with expertise. I wouldn't mess with the folks
you're describing to us.
Camilo
> Hello,
>
> > according to the sticker that came on my fischer SCS skis, fischer
> > recommends that the measured flex by 110-130% of ski body weight.
> >
>
> Thanks for that information. My sticker just has a bar code, the ski name
> and length, and the hand written 100.1 on it. What about other
> manufacturers? Do ski shops have to measure that number themselves?
You need to know that various manufacturers have their own systems. For
example, Atomic has two numbers on their classic skis, one of which should
be a percentage of the skier's body weight (in kg), something like 60% for
"universal" use, stiffer for klister skis. The other number, I believe has
to do with the tip and tail flex. I understand they mark their skating skis
similarly, but don't know what percentage it should be. Madshus, Rossi,
etc. may have a different system.
In my somewhat limited prior experience I understood that shops often test
skis upon arrival and hand mark flex test results. I also know from more
recent experience, most top line skis come marked with flex numbers from the
factory and I see less and less of hand written markings compared to a few
years ago .
Bottom line though is final follow up with a proper and detailed flex test -
with paper test by a competent local shop, or or (if mail order) with flex
and clearance gauges. You want to see how the wax pocket looks at various
positions and then balance that with the skier's athletic ability, skiing
skill and intended use (hard core race, specialty racing, fitness, etc).
For example, I ski a LOT and even race some, but will err on the side of a
slightly softer ski because it's just easier and funner in the uphills, and
fast enough going downhill. Others I know, more of the hammerhead type 8-),
prefer to err on the side of a little stiffer. YMMV.
Good mail order companies can do this for you. If I was your size, with the
local facilities you have, I would at least call up some of the better known
mail order shops and talk to them. Even though flex is more important than
length, I would want to get a longer ski than 197 if I was over 6 feet tall,
and a reputable mail order outfit would be able to provide one more in line
with optimal flex and length. Worth a try, you might be surprised that the
cost difference isn't worth messing with poor compromises available locally.
Cam
Marc Gwadz
> Hello,
>
>
>>according to the sticker that came on my fischer SCS skis, fischer
>>recommends that the measured flex by 110-130% of ski body weight.
>>
>
>
> Thanks for that information. My sticker just has a bar code, the ski name
> and length, and the hand written 100.1 on it. What about other
> manufacturers? Do ski shops have to measure that number themselves?
>
>
I don't know about other companies- I've read fischer tests the skis
to match the pairs. and the shop techs where I ordered told me they flex
test the performance skis they get. the 98kg was handwritten in a space
on a fischer pre-printed label- no idea who actually tested them.
>>so, for your weight that would suggest skis with flex of 110-130kg.
>>
>>which is why the eagle river guy told me that i'd need to get the RCS to
>>find a ski for my weight (~200lbs).
>>
>
>
> I've located a Fishcer RCS 197cm, stiff with a flex number of 117, but it's
> twice as much as the Fischer SCS pair I was thinking about buying.
>
>
>
>>i went with cheaper and sup-optimal
>>(SCS at 98kg rated flex, 108% body weight. i should just lose a couple
>>lbs...)
>>
>
>
> How are they working out?
>
>
i didn't feel like paying that much either given my ability and how
much i get to ski. the skis are working out very well, as far as i can
tell, but I'm not an expert, so maybe i don't know any better. maybe
next time i'll get the more expensive, stiffer skis...
you are a lot heavier than me, though. and the RCS are both stiffer and
have the option of the 192cm length. maybe you'll get real lucky and
find them on sale with a stiff flex.
good luck!
marc
nnn
> you are a lot heavier than me, though. and the RCS are both stiffer and
> have the option of the 192cm length. maybe you'll get real lucky and
> find them on sale with a stiff flex.
The SCS come in a 192 cm, stiff flex, on sale for $170, and the top of the
line RCS come in a197cm, stiff flex, and I've located a pair on sale for
$330 that have a 117 flex number.
"Marc Gwadz" <mgw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:LHqVd.2741$Ny6....@mencken.net.nih.gov...
gr...@gtfangel.com
>
> You're in a tough position. If I were in your position - having a
local
> source without any expertise, I'd go mail order from a company with a
good
> reputation and expertise in fitting skis via mail order. I've never
done it
> because I have local sources with expertise. I wouldn't mess with
the folks
> you're describing to us.
I know that if you buy from Gear West via mail order, they actually
have a "model" or skier with the same weight as you test the skis using
the paper test. www.gearwest.com
Greg Fangel
Marc Gwadz
> Hello,
>
>
>>you are a lot heavier than me, though. and the RCS are both stiffer and
>>have the option of the 192cm length. maybe you'll get real lucky and
>>find them on sale with a stiff flex.
>
>
> The SCS come in a 192 cm, stiff flex, on sale for $170, and the top of the
> line RCS come in a197cm, stiff flex, and I've located a pair on sale for
> $330 that have a 117 flex number.
>
does seem like a drag to pay twice as much if you aren't a racer.. but I
don't have a good sense of how detrimental it would be to use a ski that
is shorter and rated at 100% body weight vs. longer and 117%.
but maybe we could take a R.S.N. poll:
my vote: pony up for the RCS!