Introducing WNDR Alpine

[whyturn]

Saw a touring pair at Alta a few weeks ago and shape looked really good. Got good feedback from the skier as well. Look forward to new ski lineup


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Core Shot]

https://blisterreview.com/gear-revie...-intention-110

Interesting.
Not sure how much it’s saving the planet, but seems like a nice ski.

[wndr_alpine]

What’s up TGR fam,

As promised, I’m back. Today we launched the Vital 100 - an all-new ski for the 20-21 season, designed for technical backcountry skiing in the high alpine.


Complementing the Vital 100’s shape and Algal Core is a brand new sidewall material we’ve named Algal Wall. This is the first of its kind - a biobased cast polyurethane sidewall constructed with microalgae oil and engineered specifically for ski performance.

We’re quite proud of this advancement, as it further increases the biobased content of our ski, and offers the industry a performance built replacement for conventional, petroleum-based ABS sidewalls.

Beyond that, it also enables new manufacturing techniques. While conventional sidewalls arrive to ski manufacturers in a solid state and must be cut, trimmed and epoxied into place, our Algal Wall construction begins with a liquid that is poured (cast) into a trench that surrounds the core. This creates a sidewall that natively bonds to micropores in the ski’s core as it hardens, eliminating the need for additional adhesives to join the two components. The result is a more direct connection between the core and sidewall, and a more cohesive ski construction overall. To top it all off, the casting of the sidewall is a near zero waste process.

Along with this new product release, we’re also updating our original Intention 110 ski with the new Algal Wall construction.

All of this progress is due to the continued growth of our in-house materials science capabilities at our Design Lab in SLC. This ski technology platform, which we’ve affectionately named AlgalTech, will be enabling further materials development in the coming seasons.

If you want to learn more about what we’ve built, I encourage you to check out our new website, respond with any questions you have on this thread, or simply come out and ski with us at next year’s WNDR Roost!

Cheers,

Matt

[tgapp]

Looks like a cool ski! I'd be stoked to take a pair on a demo lap. Am I understanding things right that the Vital 100 weighs around the exact same as the Intention 110 in comparable lengths?

[wndr_alpine]

Thanks! Come out and try some out! The Vital 100 weighs about 150g less than the updated Intention 110 in comparable lengths. And in both skis, we made the decision to update the Algal Core by using a greater proportion of domestically sourced aspen stringers over paulownia. This helped achieve greater flexural strength (point at which the material fails) and damping, while retaining nearly identical stiffness to the previous iteration. An added benefit was gaining transparency over our source materials' origins, which couldn't be achieved with paulownia.

[tgapp]

Thanks! Come out and try some out! The Vital 100 weighs about 150g less than the updated Intention 110 in comparable lengths. And in both skis, we made the decision to update the Algal Core by using a greater proportion of domestically sourced aspen stringers over paulownia. This helped achieve greater flexural strength (point at which the material fails) and damping, while retaining nearly identical stiffness to the previous iteration. An added benefit was gaining transparency over our source materials' origins, which couldn't be achieved with paulownia.

cool yeah, i'd love to take a pair for a test drive, and i'm in slc. always fucking stoked to see local skis pop up, and i think i chatted with a member of your team in the wasatch, but i can't remember for the life of me where i met the dude skiing intentions.

one other question - why is the reverse camber profile an option on the Vital 100? i totally get the value of that on the intention 110 - even if it's not my cup of tea - but for a 100-underfoot, technically oriented ski, i'm not sure i get it. might be missing something here, and i am a total goober skier, so there's that.

[Jason4]

It seems to me that the "sustainability" in the chemical side of the process is related to the activities up to the the conversion of algae to oil. Once it is a chemical alternative to petroleum it really isn't any better or worse unless there is more to the reuse/recycling aspect. The way that we go about collecting and transporting petroleum from wells to refineries has a huge impact on the planet and the environment in terms of emissions from heavy equipment and ships, oil leaks and contamination, noise, the side effects of fracking, intrusion of chemicals in the ground water, etc. If these are all eliminated then algae based plastics are an improvement.

If the skis ski well that's a bonus.

[wndr_alpine]

cool yeah, i'd love to take a pair for a test drive, and i'm in slc. always fucking stoked to see local skis pop up, and i think i chatted with a member of your team in the wasatch, but i can't remember for the life of me where i met the dude skiing intentions.

one other question - why is the reverse camber profile an option on the Vital 100? i totally get the value of that on the intention 110 - even if it's not my cup of tea - but for a 100-underfoot, technically oriented ski, i'm not sure i get it. might be missing something here, and i am a total goober skier, so there's that.

Sweet, when it comes time get in touch and we can get you out on a pair!

That's a great question. I think a lot of people understand the viability of surfing around on a pair of Reverse Camber Intentions in fresh pow - and they're definitely great for that. But another benefit of the Reverse Camber options is their quick-pivoting nature. For big spring missions - the kind where the Vital 100 is the obvious choice - you may find yourself in tight, complex, or obstacle filled terrain. Even though you're not slashing through powder, the maneuverability of a Reverse Camber profile is going to come into play in these scenarios. Same thing goes if you're dealing with a crust or variable snowpack.

Of course, skier style and local terrain also come into play in a big way here, and there will always be plenty of skiers and scenarios where having some Camber underfoot makes the most sense. So we offer both options.

If you want to dive into the topic of camber profiles a little more, we posted this article last season. We have yet to update it with any discussion of the Vital (that's coming!), but much of what we talk about still applies to narrower skis. Cheers.

[snowaddict91]

one other question - why is the reverse camber profile an option on the Vital 100? i totally get the value of that on the intention 110 - even if it's not my cup of tea - but for a 100-underfoot, technically oriented ski, i'm not sure i get it. might be missing something here, and i am a total goober skier, so there's that.

As long as the snow isn't bulletproof, I generally prefer subtle reverse camber. If I was buying the Vital to use as a spring/technical ski I would go for the cambered profile, but if I was buying it to use in the Wasatch as a primary ski, I'd go reverse camber. Personally, I could be happy skiing a 100 underfoot reverse camber ski for all of my touring days, perhaps with a 115-120 ski for those special days.

In addition to the float, Matt mentioned the pivotability of a reverse camber ski. This is a huge benefit with a longer turn radius in that it makes the ski much more manageable. You can have a pretty stable ski that won't do weird things in weird snow, but still be able to shut it down on command and scoot around tight trees, entrances and chokes.

I did all my touring last year on cham 107s and would happily trade them for a slightly narrower ski with a longer radius and longer, lower rocker profile. Sounds like I need to get on a pair of vitals. Need any ambassadors? Lol

[stuckathuntermtn]

So, you take some algae, skip a few million years of anaerobic breakdown, entrapment in porous rocks, extraction, and then you turn it into.... polyurethane?

The shape of the of the skis look great, but you're pissing into the wind if you're still trying to tell me this is some kind of revolutionary material in any way, except maybe skipping the often destructive extraction process. But how much energy does it take to make it? What kind of chemicals? Is it somehow biodegradable? Why the fuck would anyone need this over traditional PU that's been used in Dynastars and Rossignol skis for decades now?

If you've already answered this, I'm sorry. Maybe work on your elevator pitch, man.

[wndr_alpine]

It seems to me that the "sustainability" in the chemical side of the process is related to the activities up to the the conversion of algae to oil. Once it is a chemical alternative to petroleum it really isn't any better or worse unless there is more to the reuse/recycling aspect. The way that we go about collecting and transporting petroleum from wells to refineries has a huge impact on the planet and the environment in terms of emissions from heavy equipment and ships, oil leaks and contamination, noise, the side effects of fracking, intrusion of chemicals in the ground water, etc. If these are all eliminated then algae based plastics are an improvement.

If the skis ski well that's a bonus.

For sure, you're spot on. The carbon emissions and ecosystem impacts of petroleum extraction, refinement, shipping, spillage, etc. are massive. Plus, it's a finite resource. So we make our own renewable oil in a matter of days by growing algae in fermentation tanks, without those externalities of the petroleum supply chain that you mention. As for the reuse/recycling aspect, we're not perfect out of the gate, but are currently collecting flashings and scraps from our waste stream with the intent to repurpose them into future products or components.

But on top of the impacts discussion, our goal isn't just to sit back and make any super lofty "sustainability" claims. Making your own oil opens up a lot of possibilities to create new materials, with new performance attributes, that you never could create with petroleum. That's where we get really excited! We're definitely proud of how these new skis and materials perform, and that's precisely why we're so stoked to share this project with the ski community.

[sruffian]

Hey man I wanted to give some kudos for being a bit more realistic about the currently negligible environmental impact of these skis - when sage went on blister last year I thought he was super forthright about it.

Also super glad to see a full reverse 100 waisted ski. Been wondering what I was gonna do after volkl bmt 94s are banged out and it’s good to see a skinny but rockered ski on the market again.

Question about construction - are these a blend of carbon and glass layed up over the newfangled core?

How does a full carbon ski w the algaecore compare to a full carbon ski w wood core in dampness?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[tang]

I love seeing a narrow-ish reverse camber option for a winter BC ski. I moved from a hoji down to a raven, and lost some weight and still does great in most winter conditions. I'd consider going lighter/narrower to something like the Vital.
For spring/summer though, I've gone to shorter cambered with a strong non-rockered tail. Yes, you lose the pivot-ability, but just jump turn instead in tight situations. And real light.
But this is different and a cool option.
And the tech isn't cold fusion, but anything that moves from petro seems to be a good thing.

[wndr_alpine]

So, you take some algae, skip a few million years of anaerobic breakdown, entrapment in porous rocks, extraction, and then you turn it into.... polyurethane?

The shape of the of the skis look great, but you're pissing into the wind if you're still trying to tell me this is some kind of revolutionary material in any way, except maybe skipping the often destructive extraction process. But how much energy does it take to make it? What kind of chemicals? Is it somehow biodegradable? Why the fuck would anyone need this over traditional PU that's been used in Dynastars and Rossignol skis for decades now?

If you've already answered this, I'm sorry. Maybe work on your elevator pitch, man.

No worries, stoked to have these conversations!

It’s worth noting that polyurethanes are a diverse category of materials that can make up anything from skateboard wheels to soft foams to gaskets. What’s unique about our own algae oil-derived polyurethane is that the material itself was designed in house for use in a ski sidewall. The traditional PU we’ve seen in past skis has been purchased from large scale chemical suppliers and was simply repurposed from other industries for use in skis. To create our materials, we went through around 50 different chemical formulations ourselves, and didn’t bring the material to market in a ski until we had reached the exact stiffness and bonding characteristics we knew would make our skis perform as desired.

In short, biomanufacturing gets us to more customized, application-specific materials. We now have control over our materials in a way that we never had before in our team’s collective decades of ski building experience.

Whether it’s “revolutionary” is no doubt subjective, but this technology has led to a dramatic change in the way that we design and manufacture. And perhaps more importantly: we’re extremely proud of the products it has enabled us to create.

[wndr_alpine]

Hey man I wanted to give some kudos for being a bit more realistic about the currently negligible environmental impact of these skis - when sage went on blister last year I thought he was super forthright about it.

Also super glad to see a full reverse 100 waisted ski. Been wondering what I was gonna do after volkl bmt 94s are banged out and it’s good to see a skinny but rockered ski on the market again.

Question about construction - are these a blend of carbon and glass layed up over the newfangled core?

How does a full carbon ski w the algaecore compare to a full carbon ski w wood core in dampness?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Thanks for the praise and glad you share our stoke for the shape offerings! Sounds like a Reverse Camber Vital could be a good match.

We don’t currently use carbon in our composites, and instead use a triaxial fiberglass. We seek to achieve an optimal stiffness to weight ratio through the use of our own algal materials, and though I’m not ruling out carbon as a potential part of ski construction in the future, the stiff and chattery characteristics it often yields are not desirable for what we set out to do with the Vital and Intention. If you're interested in a deep dive into the layups of the skis, definitely check out the animation here!

As for the second question, I can’t speak objectively to those specific constructions as we haven’t built them, but an Algal Core equipped ski should be lighter, more torsionally stiff, and manage vibrations better than a full wood core equipped ski.

[shirk]

Have you guys posted an specifics on the material properties differences between your algal polyurethane vs traditional polyurethane?

ASTM measurements for tensile strength, tensile modulus, elongation at break, and flexural strength, and flexural modulus?

Curious to see what differences you've been able to achieve in the materials.

I know that there is a fair amount of research ongoing to derive bio-based polymers, some are able to replicate the petroleum based alternative properties and some still fall short.

[wndr_alpine]

Have you guys posted an specifics on the material properties differences between your algal polyurethane vs traditional polyurethane?

ASTM measurements for tensile strength, tensile modulus, elongation at break, and flexural strength, and flexural modulus?

Curious to see what differences you've been able to achieve in the materials.

I know that there is a fair amount of research ongoing to derive bio-based polymers, some are able to replicate the petroleum based alternative properties and some still fall short.

Awesome questions here - I'll provide what I can! A good starting place is to check out the internal testing data we just published on complete ski properties. These data are the result of in house testing where we evaluate the whole ski as a composite. This has been extremely helpful internally, as it helps us predict and evaluate complete ski performance as we swap different material compositions in and out through different ski prototypes. And to state the obvious, complete ski performance is the most important metric when the goal is to make a ski that rides better.

If you want to dive into the properties of the material on its own, you'll need to provide specific ASTM standards and I can get our engineer Daniel in the loop to speak to them. Keep in mind that we went through about 50 different chemical formulations to arrive at the material that ended up in the production ski - and in that batch of 50, some were extremely stiff, some were more brittle, some were more elastic, some were extremely soft, etc. You can find a similarly vast degree of variance in all of the types of petroleum PU out there. Of course, none of these formulations (biobased or otherwise) are objectively “good” or “bad” until you define how they behave as part of the entire composite ski.

The benefit of our process is that we were able to test, iterate, and experiment until we found a formulation that was perfect for use in our ski designs. If we had to rely on preformulated petroleum PU from a chemical supplier, we never could have created the skis we did.

[stuckathuntermtn]

Ok, good answer.
But, dude, seriously. Brevity is your friend. The copywriting on your website is eye watering.

[alude]

Awesome questions here - I'll provide what I can! A good starting place is to check out the internal testing data we just published on complete ski properties. These data are the result of in house testing where we evaluate the whole ski as a composite. This has been extremely helpful internally, as it helps us predict and evaluate complete ski performance as we swap different material compositions in and out through different ski prototypes. And to state the obvious, complete ski performance is the most important metric when the goal is to make a ski that rides better.

The torsional stiffness numbers in the bar graph does not seem to match the other graph below (100-120 vs 300-400)?

What do you mean by complete ski performance? What are you trying to improve? Are you trying to make an unbreakable ski? The stiffest? The lightest? The stiffest for its weight? Or are you showing these number to demonstrate that you reach acceptable levels with a new material?

Keep in mind that we went through about 50 different chemical formulations to arrive at the material that ended up in the production ski - and in that batch of 50, some were extremely stiff, some were more brittle, some were more elastic, some were extremely soft, etc. You can find a similarly vast degree of variance in all of the types of petroleum PU out there. Of course, none of these formulations (biobased or otherwise) are objectively “good” or “bad” until you define how they behave as part of the entire composite ski.

The benefit of our process is that we were able to test, iterate, and experiment until we found a formulation that was perfect for use in our ski designs. If we had to rely on preformulated petroleum PU from a chemical supplier, we never could have created the skis we did.

What have you been able to achieve that conventional core would not? I mean, foam, honeycomb and other type of core material are used in a wide range of demanding composite application. What particular properties are you looking for in skiing?

[tuco]

Foam and honeycomb both proved to be not that great for a ski core....