Bring back the twister for Deneen

[jack97]

Bring back the twister so that we can all ski like Deneen.


:dunce:

 

[Greg]

Gotta buy an F17 apparently.

 

[jack97]

Gotta buy an F17 apparently.

I just got my notice of how much money I getting from the economic stimulus package. I use it up on the F17 and I will sleep with my dogs for months.

 

[Philpug]

Patrick wants to ski like Patrick on F17's. He was in the process of switching over to Hart before the Twister was discontinued.

 

[jack97]

perhaps.... but that shot of Deneen with the twister was on Jan. 20 2008 at lake placid. How did he do afterwards?

http://patrickdeneen.com/calendar.htm

 

[jack97]

How did he do afterwards?

Here's another shot of him on March 15, 2008 where he placed 3rd. Looks like twister to me.

 

[Philpug]

Patrick chose to ski out the year on the Twister, he didn't want to make that big of a change mid year. Not uncommon in situations like this.

 

[jack97]

Patrick chose to ski out the year on the Twister, he didn't want to make that big of a change mid year. Not uncommon in situations like this.

Can't resist another one... March 15, 2008 at Italy... def twister.

Yep thats right, makes sense. The kid is tune in to the twister, he should stay put for the season. I wish him all the luck on the f17 this coming season.



Other than having some fun with you and tchick, what I find interesting is that the skis are getting more shape.

IDone 95 61 85, use by Lahtela, DSB and now Chuck Martin is excited about.

twister 98 66 85

f17 104 64 92


Now I'm wondering how the straighter skis will do; volkl wall, k2 mamba and elans bloodline.

 

[Philpug]

Now I'm wondering how the straighter skis will do; volkl wall, k2 mamba and elans bloodline.

Will be interesting, it really depends on the skier and conditions. I will say, even the people who demo'ed the F17 and felt it might be too much shape (for their style and ability) said it was the fasted bump ski they ever skied.

This isn't some beefed up foam core recreational ski, it is the same construction as a race ski. In a years worth of testing we had ZERO breakage..I don't know what other manufacturer can say that about their bump ski.

 

[mondeo]

This isn't some beefed up foam core recreational ski, it is the same construction as a race ski. In a years worth of testing we had ZERO breakage..I don't know what other manufacturer can say that about their bump ski.

So you're saying it's too heavy? ;-)

 

[Philpug]

So you're saying it's too heavy? ;-)

Phil sniffs bait then swims away.

 

[jack97]

Will be interesting, it really depends on the skier and conditions. I will say, even the people who demo'ed the F17 and felt it might be too much shape (for their style and ability) said it was the fasted bump ski they ever skied.

When it comes to competition, speed isn't always your friend. Torrino 06, DBS was the slowest among mens placed. Mikko and Tobey were faster but the speed points aren't weighted that much. What got DBS the gold was his turns.

This isn't some beefed up foam core recreational ski, it is the same construction as a race ski. In a years worth of testing we had ZERO breakage..I don't know what other manufacturer can say that about their bump ski.

That could be its down fall, an expensive ski that won't break. Unlike my marriage, I like to play the field and see what other skis are like. Buying the f17 just narrows that field until I figure out some way to write off the cost.... my honest answer is thats a big con.

 

[Greg]

So you're saying it's too heavy? ;-)

And/or too stiff?

 

[mondeo]

A little bit more serious take on the durability discussion, from an engineer's POV...

Better durability is good, but it only adds value to a point. To me, a design/construction/whatever that has one in a hundred ski pairs fail after, say, 125 days, and 50% of pairs fail after 250 days is just as good as a ski where the 1% and 50% lives are 250 days and 500 days. I don't care that they last twice as long, I'll probably get new skis after 5 years anyways due to newer design philosophies, different skiing style, etc. Not saying that those are representative lives of mogul skis available, just making the point.

On the other side, making a more durable ski carries tradeoffs in design and cost. In general, better life means lower stresses, lower stresses means more material (assuming no change in general geometry,) which means more weight. Or you could change material or manufacturing methods, but if they're better and not used on a lower end ski, it's because it's more expensive; and even then, you could use the more expensive, better stuff and reduce weight further by keeping having a less durable good.

From the statement that not one ski broke during testing, if I assume there was a fairly rigourous test program, I'd guess that the ski is constructed to a durability level beyond the point where it adds value. Obviously I can't say for sure, given that I don't know the extant of the testing. There's also the possibility that the durability falls out of the other aspects of design, and isn't inherently designed for.

And then there's the economic side of it. MSRP on K2 715s in 1999 was $750, towards the high end of what bump skis list for now. So if you assume ski costs are flat, not only does a $900 F17 have to last long enough to make up for 3.5 pairs of $250 K2 Cabrawlers, but on top of that it has to make up for the 4.5% interest on the money you have sitting in a mortgage-backed security (or whatever other investment) for the period of time between the purchase of the first pair of skis and when you would have had to buy the replacement K2s.

Obviously this is just the discussion on durability, not performance.

 

[SkiDork]

but the speed points aren't weighted that much. What got DBS the gold was his turns.

for the record:

turns: 50%
airs: 25%
speed 25%


Yes, speed is only 25% but everyone gets the same weighting. It's still better to be faster than not (assuming your turns are top notch)

I'd love to see the scoresheet from the 06 olympics. Wonder if its online anywhere?

 

[jack97]

I'd love to see the scoresheet from the 06 olympics. Wonder if its online anywhere?

This is what I got from the vids; throw out the min and max turn point for DSB. For Tobey and Miko, the vid almost blanked it out. The remaining turns points are added to get the total.

dbs, raw time 22.68
[turns 4.8 4.9 4.8 4.8 4.9] [air, 6.38] [speed points, 5.89] total, 26.77

miko, raw time 21.87
[turns, 0.0 4.5 0.0 4.6 4.5] [air, 6.85] [speed points, 6.17] total, 26.62

tobey dawson, raw time 22.47
[turns, 0.0 4.6 4.5 0.0 4.7] [air, 6.54] [speed points, 5.96] total 26.30



Note, miko's raw time was close to a second faster but in terms of speed points calculation, he only got .28 advantage. IMO, if miko didn't have some slight miscues at the middle of the course, he would have gotten higher turn points and would have nailed the gold.

Also, dale had the lowest air points, what got him the gold was the turns. I would also add that dbs has speed, maybe quickest is a better term, his footwork and the way he rolls his knees is amazing.

 

[jack97]

So if you assume ski costs are flat, not only does a $900 F17 have to last long enough to make up for 3.5 pairs of $250 K2 Cabrawlers, but on top of that it has to make up for the 4.5% interest on the money you have sitting in a mortgage-backed security (or whatever other investment) for the period of time between the purchase of the first pair of skis and when you would have had to buy the replacement K2s.

Exactly my thinking. For the past decade, every company I have worked has lease equipment and software on a monthly basis to minimize the operational cost on a quarterly basis. If we bought that stuff, our operational cost and depreciation just looks lousy.

As for me, I can't get a 900 ski past my gate keeper, but I can get 200-300 ski through.

 

[SkiDork]

This is what I got from the vids; throw out the min and max turn point for DSB. For Tobey and Miko, the vid almost blanked it out. The remaining turns points are added to get the total.

dbs, raw time 22.68
[turns 4.8 4.9 4.8 4.8 4.9] [air, 6.38] [speed points, 5.89] total, 26.77

miko, raw time 21.87
[turns, 0.0 4.5 0.0 4.6 4.5] [air, 6.85] [speed points, 6.17] total, 26.62

tobey dawson, raw time 22.47
[turns, 0.0 4.6 4.5 0.0 4.7] [air, 6.54] [speed points, 5.96] total 26.30



Note, miko's raw time was close to a second faster but in terms of speed points calculation, he only got .28. IMO, if miko didn't have some slight miscues at the middle of the course, he would have gotten higher turn points and would have nailed the gold.

Also, dale had the lowest air points, what got him the gold was the turns. I would also add that dbs has speed, maybe quickest is a better term, his footwork and the way he rolls his knees is amazing.

I wonder why both Tobey and Miko had 2 zero's on their turns?

But when they're that close in time, the better turn scores are certainly going to take the win. Thats a given. But you can't ignore your speed and think you have a chance. Within 1 second is fine, but you can't be like 3 secs slower, that'll kill you.

 

[jack97]

I wonder why both Tobey and Miko had 2 zero's on their turns?

The way NBC showed the score and the way they calculated the total score, they throw out the high and low. NBC almost blanked out Tobey and Miko's highest and lowest score. For Dale they kept the all turn points on the same contrast.

But when they're that close in time, the better turn scores are certainly going to take the win. Thats a given. But you can't ignore your speed and think you have a chance. Within 1 second is fine, but you can't be like 3 secs slower, that'll kill you.

I agree with you when the differences in raw speed are so large, the calculations do reflect the difference. But if you look at the way Tobey and Miko went down the course, they went a little too fast. The miscues by Miko could have speed related, IMO, speed was not his friend....bottom line, he came up short in the turns.

 

[SkiDork]

The way NBC showed the score and the way they calculated the total score, they throw out the high and low. NBC almost blanked out Tobey and Miko's highest and lowest score. For Dale they kept the all turn points on the same contrast.




I agree with you when the differences in raw speed are so large, the calculations do reflect the difference. But if you look at the way Tobey and Miko went down the course, they went a little too fast. The miscues by Miko could have speed related, IMO, speed was not his friend....bottom line, he came up short in the turns.

I see your point. So DBS just has the rare ability to combine near perfect turns with just a hair below top speed (the < 1 sec is close enough). IMHO, when I watch his runs he seems like a machine.

Too bad he's an a-hole with that spam company of his.