Super thin edges on new skis? Help me out

[herr_stoiber]

Tried the search functionality and dug through the www but did not find much related, so here we go.

Just purchased a pair of Dynafit Chugach 188s to use as the daily touring driver (well I wish it was daily, but it's not, being a dentist/lawyer and all).

Problem: first pair I received had about 1.3mm to 1.5mm of edge thickness on one ski (side view, looking at the sidewall) but the second ski barely 1.0 millimeters of edge on them. I returned the pair, thinking it was a manufacturing problem and at least from the email of the vendor the return was accepted due to the visible difference in thickness (still waiting for the money though).

Now I ordered a new pair and on both, the edge from tip to a bit behind the binding is just 1.0mm thick, getting a bit thicker to around 1.3mm behind the binding.

Just called Dynafit and they say this is normal, both the difference between skis and that 1mm of edge is enough on the ski.

But is it? Doesn't this result in a super fragile ski? Should I try to return them anyhow, or will they last? How thick will the base be and how easy will these be to repair?

First pair I sent back:


Second pair I just received:


FYI checking my other skis (two rebranded Elan models -> these are more than 2mm even after base grinds, and a K2 Coomba that is at more than 2mm after a base grind, plus some racers with also about 2mm) the skis look like they couldn't take a hit or a service even in brand new condition. So there is a huge difference between these and the Chugachs

Please help a fellow ski mountaineer out.. need to decide whether to keep and ski or try to return.
No, I won't sell them to you for half price.

[doebedoe]

The weight has to come off from somewhere. Looks like many other Dynafit skis I've seen. Whether it's worth the durability/longevity trade off is up to you.

[trogdortheburninator]

Just depends where you ski, how you ski, and how long you expect to keep your skis.

[pancake]

You have to remember, Dynafit is a backcountry/ mountaineering company. The Chugach ski is a backcountry powder ski and an amazing ski from Dynafit. They use thinner edges on all their skis to save weight. If edge thickness is a concern of yours, look at skis that are more resort specific.

[geo039]

We thought about doing this 5 years ago but we are talking like single digit grams in savings. Kind of a funny marketing talk if you ask me.

[hnnaum]

I have same situation with Salomon mtn explore 95. Return them and got new which was ok..

[XXX-er]

that looks to me like they needed to take more material off the base to get one ski finished and a lesser amount off the other, or the manufacturing is not so controled

I never noticed this before but just for kicks I looked at some of my other skis, my DPS were all the same, my dynafit Stokes were also uneven but not quite as much, my Denali are pretty equal even one was replaced so tho they are not really a matched set

Not that it matters where but think Dynafit skis are made in the Fisher factory ?

[trogdortheburninator]

We thought about doing this 5 years ago but we are talking like single digit grams in savings. Kind of a funny marketing talk if you ask me.

Lou seems to suggest the savings could be closer to 100g per ski. https://www.wildsnow.com/12831/ski-edges-steel-weight/

[adrenalated]

Lou = opinionated blogger
Geo = actually owns a ski company

[TurxSki]

The weight has to come off from somewhere. Looks like many other Dynafit skis I've seen...

^^ This.
Dynafiddle = weight saving.
But, what with you being a *ski mountaineer*
and not just a regular skier, I am surprised you didn't work it out.

[wasatchback]

Thinner edges are usually thinner in the other direction.... what you're looking at is poor finishing of the skis... they most likely came out of the mold with some varying thickness issues so when they went through the base finishing machines they needed to grind off more material. Especially when you talk about your edges varying In thickness in different areas of the ski. This is poor production not marketing or weight savings. The varying thickness is caused by the base finishing machines.

[XXX-er]

I got both my Dynafits CHEAP when I bought the warranty returns, a 220lb ski guide crushes a pair of Stokes during in 1 week in the BC (he wasnt charging) another buddy ( probably was charging) snaps a Denali in half in ONE RUN

and you get the skins cheap cuz what else are they gona do with those lazer cut Dynafit model specific skins?

Stokes are pretty soft, the Denali are actualy fairly stiff carve like a slalom ski but they are both very light and IMO you give up durability for that

yup manufacturing differences ...they could have matched them or ground the thinner one down more?

[trogdortheburninator]

Lou = opinionated blogger
Geo = actually owns a ski company

Lou's logic seemed pretty sound in the article. I'm wondering where the discrepancy in Geo's and Lou's estimates come from.

[XXX-er]

Lou's logic seemed pretty sound in the article. I'm wondering where the discrepancy in Geo's and Lou's estimates come from.

well they may or may not be talking apples and oranges

but bigger than that one should always look at what Lou doesnt say

if he is critical or sez too much tells toomany secrets nobody is gona invite him to yurp for the free strudel

or dibs on seeing the latest greatest super light gear ...first

[geo039]

Thinner edges are usually thinner in the other direction.... what you're looking at is poor finishing of the skis... they most likely came out of the mold with some varying thickness issues so when they went through the base finishing machines they needed to grind off more material. Especially when you talk about your edges varying In thickness in different areas of the ski. This is poor production not marketing or weight savings. The varying thickness is caused by the base finishing machines.

Agree fully here. What would be the really interesting sample is the variations in base thickness. If you have shit molds, uneven pressure, poor heat distribution, etc etc skis come out of the press super uneven and need a ton of prep. I bet if you where able to peel back the Ptex of most skis you would find a super even layer. The example above is the same on the edge...but you can see it.

[geo039]

Lou seems to suggest the savings could be closer to 100g per ski. https://www.wildsnow.com/12831/ski-edges-steel-weight/

I read that super fast but Lou's math is ok with some gaps in teeth length, wrap vs gap, the real edge sizes companies actually use instead of home measurements, grinding, etc. imho there are other variables (controlling core consistency, epoxy, flatness post press) that are worth focusing on instead of degrading the ski. I am in no way the super expert in weight wanker skis but we have always, except 1 year, tried to make the ski light, damp, and robust which includes 1.9 edge that can handle euroland...and as you can see we even have alu tails that may be a bit heavier but do you really want a plastic POS? All that being said our LD90 177 is 1450 grams on average. Light, robust, damp, and solid. Could there be a savings of 15g per edge per ski cut short at 1.3...sure...is it marketing BS because it is hard enough controlling other variable (example above of inconstant edge grinding) yup.

[XXX-er]

I would agree leaving off the tip/tail wrap is a sketchy looking way to cut weight I know Salomon did that a few years ago...didnt impress me

My Dynafit Denali which are in the super light category use the aluminium tips and tails to anchor their skins and so do a lot of the new dynafit skis

SO maybe Dynafit have decided the tips and tails are a good place to add the strength with aluminium tip/tails and then maybe they can reduce weight somewhere else ??

[critical-motion]

Weight savings are a moot point here.

As Wasatchback stated, this is a manufacturing error as there is variable edge thickness along the length of a ski and differing between both skis. This means that shitty manufacturing resulted in an uneven (i.e., not flat) base that needed an excessive base grind to obtain a flat ski.

Super-thin edges are the norm for quite a few big brands. I personally can't stand skis with edges that can't stand up to abuse and multiple sharpenings and base grinds. Herr's photos don't inspire me with any confidence for the longevity of those skis.

[Vinman]

In my experience, the weight savings of a 3/4 wrap is around an ounce per ski. In terms of weight savings 1 oz isn't much but when combined with other methods of cutting weight it can add up.

Not only does this save weight, some think it makes the tip more durable. If you think of the edge like a splitting wedge...,by not having edge in the tip it prevents the edge teeth from being driven between the base and fiberglass in a head on or tail first impact.

[TurxSki]

Stop whining. Get stoked for the up https://youtu.be/-zKXIJnv8_4

[galibier_numero_un]

Stop whining. Get stoked for the up https://youtu.be/-zKXIJnv8_4

Stoke is great. I doubt anyone would disagree with you.

The OP's original question is valid, however. He's not a sponsored skier and hopes to get a useful life from his purchase. Me? I'll vote with my dollars for the small guys (Down, Praxis, ON3P) who have a grasp of quality control and a close relationship with their customers. Obviously, this isn't to say that many of the big boyz don't know how to do it right, and no doubt Dynastar, Blizzard, etc. make great product.

I had a conversation with an industry insider about LP record manufacture. The question was posed as to why two different customers of the same record pressing plant can have wildly different quality LPs (warps, surface noise, etc.).

I commented that in my experience, how you treat your vendor matters - whether it's because you lowball them, or in some other way, put a deal together that undermines the relationship and ultimately compromises quality.

What does LP production have to do with this? Dynafit OEMs their skis from Fischer if I recall. I'll bet Fischer branded skis are more consistent. How might a vendor respond to a hard bargain driven by their customer? One element relevant to this conversation is that he might try to minimize the time a ski spends in the press (time is money) - making up the difference as shown, with excessive grinding.

... Thom

[kootenayskier]

Narrow edge width is a design choice. Thin edge depth, and more particularly inconsistency of edge depth is a production issue. Dynafit started discounting their ski line much earlier than anyone else this winter, which I presumed was due to poor sales, but there may be more going on here.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I would agree leaving off the tip/tail wrap is a sketchy looking way to cut weight I know Salomon did that a few years ago...didnt impress me

Volkl Explosivs all have a edge gap on the tips, as far as I know, and I don't think any one would call them not durable or "sketch" construction. I have had many skis without edge wrap at the tip and they were fine. Same with a "plastic" vs. Aluminum tail insert, probably makes no difference. I don't think it affects quality if you're goal is to save weight.

[herr_stoiber]

Thank you very much for the opinions. As galibier nicely put it, it's a decision of whether to trust that I'll be able to get enough days and a few repairs out of a ski and I have to say I didn't think this was something I would have needed to worry about on a big brand ski that's advertised as being on the burly end of their lineup.

In any case this has taught me to either a) make sure I get my hands on the exact ski I'm going to get and not just look at any one pair in the wild and then order remotely b) prefer those companies that give a little more detail on their build - like the stock edge thickness, which allows to engage in a solid discussion in such a case and c) I'l probably have a closer look at the mentioned smaller companies in the future that value longevity over marketing or a few grams.

Summing up, I feel the majority opinion is that this is bad manufacturing and likely to come from a base that's less even than desired, requiring a deeper grind.

Still unsure a bit on how to proceed but since Dynafit customer support claims this is within their tolerance and not qualified as a return, I have a tendency towards going to my basement, cutting the skins and getting myself in a happy mood and try to enjoy the turns on these, hoping it won't make too much of a difference when I catch the first rock - and take it as a lesson learned and new item for my checklist.

I guess in case these get wrecked by something that shouldn't have killed them, I can still start the discussion about warranty :/

In case anyone is interested during my research I found this chart, just to know what's out there in terms of edge sizes. AFAIK hardly anyone can afford custom sizes and will buy what's available:

[herr_stoiber]

^^ This.
Dynafiddle = weight saving.
But, what with you being a *ski mountaineer*
and not just a regular skier, I am surprised you didn't work it out.

My sincerest apologies. Based on the limited media consumption I had during my absence from this forum, I was convinced that ever since a couple of ex-FWT pro skiers invented this radically new alternative to reaching mountains by helicopter, it's not socially accepted to just be a regular skier any more. I'm glad this is not the case, will now happily go and remove Ortovox- and Salewa branded garment from my wardrobe which I thought was necessary to be served a beer after sneaking down my usual set of blue groomers.

On a more serious note maybe I should have learned from my experiment with their bindings (2nd gen radicals ft (not the 2.0)). two winters most of the entourage had them, everyone got hurt one way or the other or had to climb down terrain retrieving suddenly lost skis. third winter all of them were sold.