The mechanics and/or physics of a waxless BC ski?

[Jesse]

I just put up a post about choosing a rugged XC ski. I was leaning towards a wider ski because I figured that it would keep my 240 lbs floating better through the snow, or at least better than my 55 mm wide Red Birds would. How much difference does a wide ski make for floating in the snow? Or do you aim more for a longer ski for a heavier person. Is there some basic formula one would use, so that you have so many grams body weight per square centimeter of ski?

Next up - the skis I'm contemplating usually have a range of 165 to 195 cm length. How much effect does increasing the length of the ski have on the turning radius? Is it significant? Should I be choosing a ski with the most sidecut possible?

[wooley12]

Get the Annum or Epoch at about 68 waist. Seems this years MGV versions are wider? Get plastic 3-pin boots. If you want to go deeper/steeper into the woods, get skins. Longer floats perceptibly more to me.

[RobRoyMeans]

I like wooley12's recommendations. Good float and not-bad stride and glide speed. Also, I agree about the skins.

Longer usually goes with "straighter". That is, the waist of the ski has to be wide enough to mount a binding and support the weight of any user. Getting a diminished radius out of that ain't likely.

That being said, I have some 210 marathon skis that turn better than my 210 10K skis. The sprinters have .75mm of sidecut; the all day skis have 1.25mm of sidecut. The radius on either pair is probably longer than found on cup DH skis.

[Baaahb]

yes, get a wide ski. longer ski will be harder to turn. too much sidecut can create issues, making the skis squirrelly or forcing only short radius turns. go with the rossy bc-125. a softer ski is easier to turn than a stiff ski...get a wide, not too long, soft ski

[jellero]

speed= float
bottom surface area= float
short and fat usually is a good mix with easy turning without excessive speed. j
hey baab, didn't see you post but you are pretty right...