Infrared Ski Waxer

[KillerMonkey]

https://www.mountainflow.com/collect...rared-ir-waxer

Anybody try these out yet? Interested if its worth investing in. Found who mountainflow is probably sourcing them from on alibaba for cheaper but wanted to see if anybody else has any experience.

Thanks

[Core Shot]

Why?

Irons work.

And hotboxes are better (for long soaks) and easy to build. I really don’t get the IR benefit for all that money.

Edit. So yeah. You crayon. Then IR.
But you can crayon and then iron. Or crayon and cork.
The “time saving” is from not scraping if you don’t lay on so much wax that you need to scrape.

[Kopi_Red]

Interesting. I’ve never heard of an infrared ski water before.

[hoarhey]

I saw this at a Nordic ski shop 15 years ago


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[doubleeject]

Local shop has an infrared Wintersteiger waxer I was able to fool with once. The claim is it allows for better wax penetration, not sure about the veracity of that claim, but it was easy and fast to use. The price of that infrared deal in the alibaba link seems comparable to a lot of wax irons.

[spudbumkin]

DATOUBOSS Handheld Infrared Paint Curing Lamp 1000w Shortwave Infrared Paint Lamp Paint Baking Dryer Car Body Repair Tool 110V https://a.co/d/ad5gZLF


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[toast2266]

Local shop got one. It's way faster, and they say it cuts down on their wax usage by a massive amount. I think they said they get about 2.5X more skis done per bar of wax.

[jackattack]

I could see myself going for one of these. I like to crayon on the wax and then iron it in over a few passes. I usually start with a molybdenum bar then follow up with universal cold or warm for spring. I think it would improve the workflow to apply a small amount of wax in two passes and then follow up with the brush.

The unit in the OP is available on Amazon for about $100 less.

[wantriot]

https://www.mountainflow.com/collect...rared-ir-waxer

Anybody try these out yet? Interested if its worth investing in. Found who mountainflow is probably sourcing them from on alibaba for cheaper but wanted to see if anybody else has any experience.

Thanks

Pull the trigger on the Alibaba option and report back!

[ZomblibulaX]

Meh.

The boss landed one in our shop this year, it has some marginal advantages, primarily less wax usage and less scraping. I've worked with infrared waxers at a couple of different shops over the last decade. They're pretty damn cool. However:

-it's not a Wax Future, which has the advantage of getting the ski off your bench and running a program that you dial in while you work on something else, and is a million times more consistent than you can be with your hands. (And way more expensive)

-it doesn't get the same level of saturation as an iron unless you are doing a lot of passes at which point... an iron works pretty good.

-it works using primarily light, instead of just heat, so it requires the base to absorb rather than reflect light. Works good on black bases. Slightly less so on clear bases. Very much less so on red, orange or yellow solid-color bases.

Infrared waxing works great as a hot box alternative, when you're ironing in wax and letting the infrared continue to bake it in, or as a quick wax alternative to save on materials costs and reduce labor. It is a great add-on if you're doing a lot of waxing, but those little light bars aren't really a good stand-alone option in lieu of an iron. Particularly after grinding a ski, or using chemical base cleaners. It just isn't as effective at getting a lot of material back in to your base. SFB might argue with me on this, but unless you're running a pretty high-volume back shop, you're better off with just an iron.

[eSock]

Just saw they released v2.0

https://mountainflow.com/products/ir-waxer-2-0

If it's really faster and causes less mess I'm interested since I've got a bundle of skis between me and the lady to work through

Is there anything unique to a skibase/waxing about their product compared to the generic Amazon/alibaba offerings? Since they talk about tuning the wavelength.. Is that sales bs or actually useful?

[flyingskiguy]

I bought last year's version, and returned it. Took forever to melt wax, especially since my skis are stored in a cold garage. Forget about it if your skis don't have black bases - lighter color bases especially reflect all that IR.

I found a $30 1500w heat gun was much faster for quick wax jobs. Be very careful not to overheat your bases or smoke your wax, but it's not rocket science. A few quick passes up and down the ski with the gun 12" away gets the whole ski nice and warm and the wax soaks right in. Perfect accessory for travel waxing, and works great with the crayon method for minimal waste. Obviously no tight control of temperature so wax nerds be warned, but I can't imagine the IR waxer offers that either. Not a technique for race day, but for a 10 min wax swap in the motel because temps plummeted overnight, it gets the job done well and fast.

[Vitamin I]

I never got around to writing a review of Mtn Flow's previous version of it. My take is pretty much exact same as what ZomblibulaX wrote 3 posts above about IR in general, but I will write something anyway.

Just saw they released v2.0

https://mountainflow.com/products/ir-waxer-2-0

If it's really faster and causes less mess I'm interested since I've got a bundle of skis between me and the lady to work through

Is there anything unique to a skibase/waxing about their product compared to the generic Amazon/alibaba offerings? Since they talk about tuning the wavelength.. Is that sales bs or actually useful?

TIME:
For me, the IR is NOT faster than an iron. Takes me much longer overall, because I never waste time scraping anyway for my own skis --- I just ski off the wax, even if I use an iron instead, no matter how thick the wax layer is. (My fave waxes ski very fast without scraping, but some other waxes ski very slow and grabby until I ski off the thick unscraped layer.).

Takes even longer to melt it all if you crayon it on thicker than necessary, so you learn pretty quick that it's best to crayon only a very very thin layer, which melts faster, and works great---plus makes your wax bar last for many, many more waxing jobs than the standard iron method. Takes even longer to melt the harder waxes with IR.

Also, I watched a Mtn Flow rep use the 1.0 in person. He waxed many skis (indoors) to demonstrate the IR waxer and to stoke people with free wax jobs. Yeah, he did it very very slow and took a ton of time, but I gained some pointers to speed up my skills, but still was too slow for me in the end. I doubt any Mtn Flow rep would dare say "it's fast", but sure, maybe "2.0 might be faster than 1.0", not sure, never tried 2.0 yet.

If you enjoy taking it slow and sipping your beer during long waxing sessions, then the IR waxer could be for you. But if you prioritize saving time, then not a good call.

MESS:
But yes, no mess, because no scraping with IR, because the leftover layer of wax is so thin. That was a requirement for me for a while, when I waxed indoors in an office, for other skiers who wouldn't tolerate a thick layer of unscraped wax---and I wasn't allowed to mess up that office with wax scraping bits everywhere. So IR was great for that.

WAX AMOUNT:
IR uses WAY less wax than iron, so saves you that money. With iron, you need a thicker layer of wax to ensure you protect the base from the contacting iron.

DAMAGE RISK:
With the 1.0, you can't really burn your base with IR unless you're so dumb that you WAY, WAY overdo it. I tested this on a beater trash ski, and yes I eventually burned a base by holding it in one spot for a long, long time. I think the pct of people dumb enough to screw up will be very very tiny. Maybe if you somehow drop a big chunk of wax on your base, then instead of pulling it off, you just hold the IR Waxer in that spot to try to melt it---well, then the uncovered base near that chunk could get burned if you are dumb enough to hold it still that long just waiting for the big chunk to melt.

AMAZON / ALIBABA KNOCK-OFFS
I never tried those, but to me, the Mtn Flow IR Waxer 1.0 seems pretty much like just a convenient handheld standard toaster with reflectors that focus the heat/rays in one desired direction---doesn't seem like a high-tech wavelength device to me. I wouldn't be surprised one bit if the low-tech knock-offs end up working similarly as good. Not sure.

OVERALL
For my personal priorities, I strongly prefer the time savings of a standard iron, where it melts super fast, and I can be faster to run the whole length of the ski (but keep in mind that I don't waste time scraping the thick layer of wax). Also keep in mind, if you're a racer who already invested money in all the gear/coaching/training/travel/etc, then you should probably just splurge on tried & true waxing gear no matter the cost.

-

Again, to be clear, I haven't tried Mtn Flow's new 2.0 version of it.

.

[stuckathuntermtn]

I bought last year's version, and returned it. Took forever to melt wax, especially since my skis are stored in a cold garage. Forget about it if your skis don't have black bases - lighter color bases especially reflect all that IR.

I found a $30 1500w heat gun was much faster for quick wax jobs. Be very careful not to overheat your bases or smoke your wax, but it's not rocket science. A few quick passes up and down the ski with the gun 12" away gets the whole ski nice and warm and the wax soaks right in. Perfect accessory for travel waxing, and works great with the crayon method for minimal waste. Obviously no tight control of temperature so wax nerds be warned, but I can't imagine the IR waxer offers that either. Not a technique for race day, but for a 10 min wax swap in the motel because temps plummeted overnight, it gets the job done well and fast.

Yeah, the device seems a bit gimmicky. Anything warm is giving off infrared rays. That looks like a heating lamp.
I'd be down to not have to scrape, but that thing looks dumb.
And for storage and prep and all that, obviously, I'm using an iron.
Minimize the amount of wax you drip on the ski and keep your scraper sharp and it's not a big deal. Then again, this would be good for someone who's home situation doesn't allow for much work space. And it would be good for very hard cold temp waxes, maybe?
Also, for that price, I'd have to go through almost $200 in wax for it to make sense financially vs an iron. That's years. Maybe decades.

[ZomblibulaX]

Yeah, the device seems a bit gimmicky.

The device is an automotive paint curing lamp. Gimmicky is par for the course.

But hey, Viagra treats hypertension and angina too.

[detrusor]

I’ve got the 1.0, works ok. Saves wax, saves time scraping. I’m not super impressed…$150 plus shipping and it’s yours.

[stuckathuntermtn]

The device is an automotive paint curing lamp. Gimmicky is par for the course.

But hey, Viagra treats hypertension and angina too.

So it's just this? (Actually close to wax iron pricing)
https://www.homedepot.com/p/VEVOR-In...B&gclsrc=aw.ds
Fuck them for that. Are they a publicly traded company or something? Even $100 would seem reasonable and probably be a good markup from whatever the factory in China charges.

[jj111]

So it's just this? (Actually close to wax iron pricing)
https://www.homedepot.com/p/VEVOR-In...B&gclsrc=aw.ds
Fuck them for that. Are they a publicly traded company or something? Even $100 would seem reasonable and probably be a good markup from whatever the factory in China charges.

Lmao. At least this car lamp is better than when people were selling the suspension.

[normie17]

I tried it, it sucks. You definitely have to be waxing at room temp to use it. I don't see any use over Iron. My iron is faster.

[Core Shot]

Inventing something that’s worse than what exists
Hah.

Irons are fine.
Hotboxes are a different story. Long hot soaking like a Mormon.

An iron at lower temp can open the pores without burning the base
And I do scrape. But not much since I don’t over wax.

[wilcox510]

It sounds like overall people aren't super impressed. To me the big appeal is not having to scrape. But couldn't you just use the same technique of "crayoning" on the wax and then just using your iron (which most of us presumably already own) for the same effect of using minimal wax?

[Full Trucker]

Long hot soaking like a Mormon.

So long as someone shakes the bed.

[MarsB]

It sounds like overall people aren't super impressed. To me the big appeal is not having to scrape. But couldn't you just use the same technique of "crayoning" on the wax and then just using your iron (which most of us presumably already own) for the same effect of using minimal wax?

The answer is yes.

[Dantheman]

I'll have to try this "crayoning" thing (with an iron, not this stupid IR thing). I never would have thought that would work. I haven't scraped in years. Chase the iron on the final pass with shop cloth, ski off the rest. Anything beyond that is entirely unnecessary unless you're a competitive racer.

[Skeeze]

I highly recommend crayoning the wax on and putting fiberlene/a shop towel under the iron for the final pass. Touch the wax to the iron before crayoning for cold waxes, as crayoning can be a workout with those.

Saves a bunch of wax and requires zero scraping.

I’d only be interested in the infrared solution if it allowed the wax to penetrate the base much better, but I haven’t heard that to be the case yet.