Idea for pollen on skis

The graph seems to illustrate that most absorption occurs within the first 4 minutes or so, after which I would have to concluded that pores are being saturated. Seems reasonable. What is missing from the graph legend is what the conditions are during the time scale. I would have to assume from what I see is that the absorption is measured at times of ptex exposure to molten wax. That is, the heated wax should have been applied to a prewarmed (to the stated temperature) ptex base and remained in that temperature state for the stated times on the graph. That would make sense to me. The graph does not indicate that heat is removed at time zero and cooling is occuring over the time interval studied.

The graph essentially proves that hot boxes are a waste of time. Also, the stories of US ski team techs repeatedly waxing skis all summer long to prep them for the upcoming season is also a waste of time. After all, it would be assumed that such treatment would make sense if that meant that so much wax is absorbed that they would never have to be waxed again. Of course that is not so. They probably get waxed between each run. Me thinks that these technicians are creating employment for themselves during those slow summer months.

There are lots of caveats not knowing how they set up the experimental conditions, however the data look so clean that I am assuming it to be reliable.

I am not convinced that any wax is or can be absorbed once the wax is a solid. I would argue that it is likely that once the ptex begins to cool that the dimensions of the pores shrink and squeeze wax out of the pores. Of course even if that did happen the pores (now smaller) would still be filled with wax.

Still I have to say that I was surprised when I got a more durable wax finish on my skis this year with a liquid wax application and brushing than my hot wax applications. This included doing paraffin wax applications on the edge margins as recommended followed by a regular wax overlay. This method seemed marginally better, but I went far longer before the bases looked dry with the liquid application.

I like my brass brush. In some respects with the fiber brush I can get what appears to be a similar finish, but it takes a lot more work and in the end, if I follow up with the brass I can remove more wax as evidenced by the wax particles removed. I don't even waste my time with the fiber brush anymore. I really do not have steel brush experience, but it does come recommended by racers. My guess is that a similar finish can be achieved with steel and a far less aggressive action than with the brass. I think if care is taken it can be done without any damage. After all, steel is used all the time to clean bases. Choices. But then I use a metal scraper on my skis and that is supposed to be a no-no. My base structure lasts all season long even after a dozen wax jobs.

Why the heck to do I do all this? I don't race! However, I find that I spend most of the time applying and scraping the wax and the brushing takes almost no time.

I would still like to hear of someone applying the use of a ski brush to rid the bases of pollen in the field. If they can pull wax out of base structure, they ought to get pollen out just fine.

My biggest concern from the current posts is from Big Steve who claims that skiers who do not wax their skis still accumulate the pollen. In this case, there might be no hope! On the other hand a brush may still help those people as well.

Assuming that pollen is not that tightly bound to the base, then I can see where accumulated pollen could certainly foul any ski glue. I would certainly want to get rid of it before reapplying my skins.

Alan

Alan, I'm wondering what you mean when you suggest that brushing in the field might remove pollen accumulations. In my experience, the pollen on a bad day accumulates so rapidly and in such quantities that it would clog my (brass) brush in no time. Also, because the pollen is a tarry substance, not dry like hardened ski wax, there'd be some remaining on the ski anyway....following which another coating of tar would accumulate within several hundred feet. What's to gain here? Am I misunderstanding what you're saying? Have you actually tried this?

I've had my best luck to date with Hertl Spring Solution (second to which some of the expensive fluorinated, graphited and/or molybdenum-fortified waxes have also made a perceptible difference). Like Steve, I've tried leaving a thick, un-scraped coating of wax in order to scrape it off in the field (with pollen coating attached) but haven't found this workable. I've also cleaned bases with solvents between runs, and this works as well as anything--it's sometimes an absolute necessity if I want to re-skin (I haven't noticed big differences between citrus cleaners and white gas, so I carry some citrus stuff in a spray bottle; other solvents, like rubbing alcohol or paint thinner, also work).

Some folks swear by Zardoz, and I'm always meaning to try this but never get around to it. For the most part, direct observation tells me that many people will swear by whatever they happen to have paid money for, or spent a lot of time on, or in other respects gotten over-invested in. What they swear by, therefore, doesn't necessarily bear any resemblance to whatever might actually be true--about wax choices or about anything else. Maybe the same is true about me!

At home, I'm always convinced I'm going to outsmart the pollen next time out--by waiting until after it rains, by climbing above its elevation, by skiing only the steepest possible slopes (where base stickiness is less of a factor), whatever. Sometimes these various strategies are successful, but sometimes they fail as miserably as anything else.

Still looking for the magic solution.

Mark

Brushes are best kept at the wax bench.

Liquid waxes can work good if you have some wax already in the ski base as it will bond better and be a bit more durable.

The graph isn't the best and all I could come up with on short notice. I am digging thru disks to find a better one.

Alan, it does really absorb more. I saw a great demonstration by a chemist in Switzerland: used several different wax application methods on different sections of a ski and did this with 10 skis. Shaved and analysed the wax penetration. Best was a hot box application of soft wax at 120 degrees C for 1+ hours. Cool, scrap, brush.

Nature 1 Skiers 0
Actually Markhof comes the closest with go higher, go steeper,go scrape, repeat
I would never ever let my precious brass brush touch pollen.

A heavy coat of pine tar on my Bonna 2400's scares off any pollen grains that even think they can get a free ride.

Nature 1   Skiers 0
Actually Markhof comes the closest with go higher, go steeper,go scrape, repeat

Add to that: Go east. Far less pollen east of the crest.