Base bevel thoughts?

[iriponsnow]

I’ve been working thru evolving my skiing from technical to more flowy. I’ve been running 0.5 on my skis forever. Just curious if 1.0 or 1.5 or whatever would make them lesser twitchy/hooky.

What are others using?

[2FUNKY]

Yes and no.

[3PinGrin]

Mogul tune!

[gregL]

What ski is this?

At my house, race skis usually get .5/3, "All Mountain" skis 1/2, and Powder or Touring skis 1/1.

[oftpiste]

1/3

[skizix]

Check: 1-2...1-2...

There are no race skis in my house. 1/2 is my all-purpose, CO bevel. YMMV

[galibier_numero_un]

1/1 for all mtn., pow and touring.

My 92 degree SVST side bevel guide remains unused (why isn't it called "88"). No doubt, I'd bite better into bulletproof with the 92, but I'm fine as is.

The last time I owned race skis, no one knew about global warming and I didn't know about varied bevels. 0/0 worked fine. Ignorance is bliss ;-)

I pay more attention to detuning. I've pondered playing with a 2 degree base bevel at tip/tail (the areas where I detune), keeping with a 1 degree in the center 2/3 of my skis.

... Thom

[SJG]

I go 2/2, I like them "loose". Very forgiving.

[rod9301]

I go 2/2, I like them "loose". Very forgiving.

2 and 2? Why not just take a file at 45 degrees to your edges?

Sent from my Armor_3 using Tapatalk

[XXX-er]

I run an edgefile along the sidewalls when they get nicked, otherwise I don't overthink it

[gaijin]

I've been questioning for years why people think 1/1 is standard for a carving ski at, say, 85mm waist but as soon as you suggest maybe a 2/2 makes sense for a 100mm waist dorks get all up in arms.

The only reason I haven't gone 2 on my base is because I fear it'll suck, and I can't turn back.

Why haven't you dorks figured out base bevels yet for wide skis? How is it possible that a 85mm waisted carving ski deserves the same base bevel as a 112mm waisted what-ever-the-fuck?

Then again, half the dudes on this board don't even wax.

[The Tortoise]

Man, where's Epicski when you need it

[I've seen black diamonds!]

1/2.

[SumJongGuy]

My thoughts are that beyond .5 we should call base bevels "side rocker"..

[SJG]

My 2/2 bevel is on a 99 and 108mm waisted ski. Works great! I should make a "I ski a 2/2 bevel" sticker on my skis to see people get all wound up in the lift lines.....

I've been questioning for years why people think 1/1 is standard for a carving ski at, say, 85mm waist but as soon as you suggest maybe a 2/2 makes sense for a 100mm waist dorks get all up in arms.

The only reason I haven't gone 2 on my base is because I fear it'll suck, and I can't turn back.

Why haven't you dorks figured out base bevels yet for wide skis? How is it possible that a 85mm waisted carving ski deserves the same base bevel as a 112mm waisted what-ever-the-fuck?

Then again, half the dudes on this board don't even wax.

[XXX-er]

Then again, half the dudes on this board don't even wax.

Us Dentists are all into Phantom so we don't have to

[EWG]

1/1


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[swissiphic]

I’ve been working thru evolving my skiing from technical to more flowy. I’ve been running 0.5 on my skis forever. Just curious if 1.0 or 1.5 or whatever would make them lesser twitchy/hooky.

What are others using?

Had success with an experiment on my fat mostly backcountry skis with an extreme base edge bevel/somewhat 'spoon' tip base material cleaving.

Have some k2 darksides with rockered tip/flat tail and found them kinda hooky in breakable crust and soft slab/upside down coastal snow.

Did an aggressive detune for the length of the rockered tip edges into a few inches of running surface. That helped a bit but the basic feel was the same. Pulled out the cross hatch bastard file, eyeballed it, and started shaving more material off the base edge and about 10-15mm into the base itself. No clue what the actual angle is but when i put a true bar to the base the gap at edge is about 1.5mm or so. The edge itself is still detuned/somewhat rounded for the rocker section, transitioning to just detuned for the rest of the ski...don't like sharp edges.

Dramatic improvement in preferred ski feel...totally eliminated hooking in all varieties of breakable crust, soft slab and upside down coastal snow. In spring refreeze/firm conditions, ski turns engage smoothly, predictably and skis just generally feel more friendly. Skis do pretty good on groomed corduroy too, no surprises from the tips, smooth turn initiation.

[stuckathuntermtn]

All my non-rockered skis are great at .5 base, and I never have problems sliding them, making different turn shapes, or "flowing".
Rocker and taper seem to necessitate 1 at the base or they try to hook up and can't. It also makes them bouncy on the hard downhill side of moguls which is just fantastic.

[reckless toboggan]

Something like this should work...

Attachment 278156

[Dee Hubbs]

Mine are 1, 2. Because those are the tools I have. I own a 1° base bevel file guide, and 88° edge file guide.

[glademaster]

2 and 2? Why not just take a file at 45 degrees to your edges?

Sent from my Armor_3 using Tapatalk

If you aren't running a 2 degree base edge bevel on your powder skis, you're blowing it.

[SJG]

I always love those that proclaim all that is/isn't that haven't tried it.

[gwat]

I find .5 base wayy to catchy for my skiing. Going to .75 was a noticeable improvement. Now I tune everything to 1 degree and I like it.
Side edges are 2. Obviously.

[RShea]

The base bevel which some go as low as .5 or up to 1 degree but then you have to pick a side edge bevel that you are going to stay with also. Most will be using 1 degree base, and either 2 or 3 degree side depending on the performance, how hard packed or soft and pow like the snow is and how often you want to sharpen and tune them. Other variables out there also like rocker skis vs traditional camber skis also.