Typical snowboard speeds down a slope...
Sam
down a slope? Sometimes I feel like I'm going pretty good (from the
wind noise) but it's hard to judge. Maybe up to 40-45 mph?
Sam
Mr. Splodge
I've heard of skiers going 120mph. It all depends on gradient and
friction. Increase one and reduce the other and who knows how fast you
can go. I can't imagine being able to go too fast on a board though,
the slightest edge pressure and you'd be away at that speed.
Mr. Splodge
Margus Freudenthal
meters of vertical drop, but we call them hills) organizes weekly
"downhill" competitions. Their website is down at the moment, but I
remember that some snowboarders had achieved about 90-100 kmh.
Considered that the hill is quite small, one might expect at least 150
kmh on a decent slope and better equipment (nobody uses racing boards
here).
--
Margus
Sam
Yeah, I've seen the olympics, and it's impressive what those speed
skiers do. But I don't think too many boarders are reaching terminal
velocity down the slopes of Vail (sure as hell hope not!). I'm just
trying to figure out a rough average of the upper range of speeds
obtained by the typical weekend boarder (in fairness, I wasn't very
clear about that). Like I said, I've gone up to what feels like 45
mph on a 156. I've got access to a radar gun, so if nothing else I
could throw it in my pack for a couple runs and clock my friends.
Sam
jw
I think your average skilled snowboarder carving down an average slope will
be doing maybe 25 - 30 mph (35 - 50 kph?).
Sort of like on water, it always feels like you're going faster than you
really are.
As far as top speeds mentioned by other posters, I don't know.
-jw
Arvin Chang
That's pretty fast. The max theorectial speed would be 112 kmh (mgh =
.5mv^2), and that's if the person were to jump 50m off a cliff and
with no air or ground resistance (133kmh for 70 m)
I think I've gone a least around 50 mph (sorry, I'm an American...
errr 72 kmh), it's hard to judge speed... but I know I've cleared a 60
foot (18m) jump before. Let assume I didn't go any high than 10 ft in
the air, that means I was in the air for roughly .78 seconds (S
=.5gt^2) - so I must have travelling a minimum of 23m/s = 83 kmh,
which is about 50 mph.
That's just the fastest I've gone on a jump... I've gone faster on the
slopes (although normally I prefer to go quite a bit slower). My
numbers are mostly estimates (except the length of the jump, that was
measured by the people building the park). If I went more than 10 feet
in the air, then I might have been traveling slower. Let's see if I
was 15 feet in the air, that would be an airtime of .96 seconds, which
would mean that I was only going 67 kmh or only 40 mph.
Which would you believe more? That I was 10 ft in air and going 50
mph, or that I was 15 ft in the air or going 40 mph.
--arvin
Chris
you're really maybe 20. Much over 20 and you'd be pretty scared,
and at risk of having your lift ticket revoked.
Sam <wrxp...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2ce4f4ae.02100...@posting.google.com...
criste oesel
> really are.
i think, it always feels slower than real-speed. walk down a slope by feet,
here you can see how fast you are. i think the normal snowboarders speed is
around 40-60km/h. i know some take-off speeds from boarders who jumped over
big kickers. they had about 60-70 for a 20m jump and about 90km/h for a 44m
jump. and in comparison to this speeds i think i reach on some slopes the
100km/h-mark and in general i think i ride about 70km/h when i only ride the
slope and do no tricks or riding switch etc.
ciao
criste
phil
> 45, when you're really maybe 20. Much over 20 and you'd be pretty
> scared, and at risk of having your lift ticket revoked.
Absolutely, check any other speed sport for the same effect. Watch some
downhill races and notice how their speeds are incredibly faster than
anything you could sensibly do on a slope with other users. Stick a GPS in
your pocket, then board all day, ensuring that you're never overtaken.
That'll easily give you the top percentile - the average is much, much
slower. Come to think of it, I already did that both on Piste and in
helicopter-assisted back country.
My piste data will be on a backup somewhere but I don't have it. I do have
the heli data. Quickly looking at a few typical runs from one day shows that
typically speeds peak at about 50 or 60kph. The helicopter runs at about
180kph. Tree runs are obviously slower. Obviously you could do more if you
tried; I haven't looked to find the peak speed 'cos I don't care about it.
I'm faster than most in the back country as I've done it a lot and I take
pictures. Skiiers are slower in powder full stop.
Piste speed profiles will be different, but they're not going to be that
much faster in general.
Phil
Dreadz11
speen run at les arcs. i think he got to about 250km/h. he also holds the
record on a bike, set on the same slope. if you've ever stood at the top of
this run you'll know how crazy this is (i wouldn't even board down it).
i...@bartron.geek.net
(http://www.lesarcs.com/gb/speed_skiing.htm) .
The advantage of the skiers is that they can get down much lower than the
snowboarder.
I remember seeing an interview with Drew Nielson (master boardercross rider)
who said that they've been clocked as high as 100Km/h .
I remember watching a GS or Super-G snowboard race and they clocked the
racers doing over 100Km/h (don't remember the exact number.) I remember this
quite clearly because I was amazed that Dieter Krassnig was racing wearing
sunglasses and a red toque that seemed to be barely hanging on to his bald
head ! He looked like a friggin' shriner.
'later...
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| "If you make people think they are
Ian You may answer in | thinking, they will love you; if you
English, French, German | make them think, they will hate you."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - Don Marquis
Luca Diana
Depends, a friend of mine owns a racing board and he has been clocked
at 95Mph (that's over 150Km/h), I don't think I ever passed 50mph
(80Kph)
Luca
--
When Hell freezes over...
...I'll be snowboarding there too!!
Luca Diana
>On 9 Oct 2002 09:55:30 -0700, Sam wrote:
>
>>Does anybody here have a good feel for how fast a board will get going
>>down a slope? Sometimes I feel like I'm going pretty good (from the
>>wind noise) but it's hard to judge. Maybe up to 40-45 mph?
>
>Depends, a friend of mine owns a racing board and he has been clocked
>at 95Mph (that's over 150Km/h), I don't think I ever passed 50mph
>(80Kph)
Of course I'm not encouraging anyone to ride fast in a resort, you
would lose your lift ticket and worse you could hurt yourself and/or
someone else. I did it late night when there was noone around and I
was the first one on a freshly groomed slope (that helps increasing
speed), but I remember thinking "If I hit a tree now I'm history". If
you want to go fast try McKinley in Alaska ;-)
Luca Diana
>That's on skis . The snowboard record is 202Km/h .
>
>(http://www.lesarcs.com/gb/speed_skiing.htm) .
>
>The advantage of the skiers is that they can get down much lower than the
>snowboarder.
>
>I remember seeing an interview with Drew Nielson (master boardercross rider)
>who said that they've been clocked as high as 100Km/h .
>
>I remember watching a GS or Super-G snowboard race and they clocked the
>racers doing over 100Km/h (don't remember the exact number.)
That's not fast for a racer, but obviously that was probably a peak
speed on a curved course, records are held going pretty much downslope
with no turning.
Jay
"Baka Dasai" <idontr...@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:ap0jtm$q80nb$2...@ID-128080.news.dfncis.de...
> On 9 Oct 2002 09:55:30 -0700, Sam said (and I quote):
> > Does anybody here have a good feel for how fast a board will get going
> > down a slope? Sometimes I feel like I'm going pretty good (from the
> > wind noise) but it's hard to judge. Maybe up to 40-45 mph?
>
> 20 kmh (about 12.5 mph).
>
I tried measuring my speed with a gps last year. Problem was it was the end
of the season on a very soggy slope and with a totally naff board but I
still managed nearly 30 kmh and it really didn't feel very fast. I would
sort of guess maybe 50 kmh is the top speed for an intermediate level
boarder but I think you're right that 20 is nearer the mark for a lot of
people.
Only a few more weeks to go and I can try it again.....
Jay.
peej
> for the fact that part of your motion is downwards, ie the losing
> altitude part. Bad ASCII art follows:
Your analysis works for distances calculated on a 2d map, although of course
slope angles aren't generally as high as one might like to think.
The GPS certainly records x, y, and z and I would assume that speed is
calculated using all three (plus time of course)... but I haven't actually
confirmed that.
Looking at my data very briefly and unscientifically speed seems to
correlate with slope: that is, the steeper the slope the faster I go. If the
GPS wasn't calculating using z then you'd expect this to be the other way
around, or at least less pronounced. Not definitive..
When I get some time I'll check with the source data, unless someone beats
me to it.
phil
Frazer Mountford
"peej" <pe...@binternet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3db52ac2$0$209$4d4e...@read.news.fr.uu.net...
> > A GPS might underestimate your speed because it wouldn't account
> > for the fact that part of your motion is downwards, ie the losing
> > altitude part. Bad ASCII art follows:
>
> Your analysis works for distances calculated on a 2d map, although of
course
> slope angles aren't generally as high as one might like to think.
I would have thought a GPS will account for uphill and downhill angles as it
knows what altitude you are at, therefore it can work out (c) using
Pythagoras theorem a2+b2=c2 (2 = square) however I have been told that it is
not very reliable at sussing altitudes but not sure on this, If a GPS
doesn't use this (id be surprised if it doesn't) it would suss your speed as
the crow flies (b)
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
a| \c
| \
| \
| \
| \
| \
|________\
b
Jay
Actually I don't know if they measure horizontal speed or total speed. I
could try throwing it off the balcony but that might not be such a good
idea. Any skydivers out there want to do an experiment? I was using an etrex
but I guess they all work in a similar way.
Horizontal accuracy is better than vertical and this is certainly true of
position (by a factor of 10 or so) but speed is still measured independently
by doppler shift so vertical speed accuracy might still be reasonable.
Anyway, more importantly, I've just heard some of the local slopes (in
Finland) might be open this weekend :-) :-)
Jay.
Sam
I've also heard that civilian GPS is great at determining x and y (or
latt and long) but not so good at elevation. This is because a very
slight change in calculation angle will have a very large effect on
the resulting elevation calculation. I'm not actually sure if this is
the case for changes in elevation though. Could just be absolute
measurements.
Sam
4chri...@gmail.com
Bob F
Lawrence Bird
news:0f30e285-6b18-4bf7...@googlegroups.com:
advanced intermediate. Speeds in the mid 50s are possible in good
conditions by better riders.
The tracking apps are only as good as your GPS and error bars do not appear
to be a thing, though should be (if you have the option, look at the track
it displays and compare to your memory of the run)
Unless you plan to ride hard boots and compete in GS, urge you not to get
too caught up in speeds/times. It is easy to push a bit too hard for a new
'best' and wrecks at high speeds are no fun. At the least, make sure trees
are well away - you can slide pretty far and still with enough speed to
cause severe injury.
Finally - though it may be counter intuitive - carved runs are often at
higher speed than straightline