Fastest Base Material?

[John Bell]

Does anyone know?

This site says it's P-Tex 4000, but it doesn't address the 7200 and 8000 I've also heard about--not to mention Burton's "WFO", Whatever the FO that is:

http://people.bath.ac.uk/cjht20/Advanced%20Engineering%20Materials%20for%20Sports%20Equipment.htm

And what about DuraSurf?

[pebu]

Durasurf is just another name brand of UHMW is it not? (same as PTex.) I'd imagine different grades would be optimal for different tempuratures/conditions. I don't know much about the grades of ptex and how they react to snow, but I do know that there's never a do-all material for everything you want it for.

[nekdut]

Classic Madd 158 speckle.

Magic base fastness :)

[MUD]

I think the 4000 series is the most common of the P-TEX used in high performance areas, the higher numbers are difficult to wax and structure. Because of this they are not used very often.

Durasurf is going to be comparable.

Which is "fastest" is relative. Wax, and structure play a large role in the speed of a base.

[LeeW]

Classic Madd 158 speckle.

Magic base fastness :)

that was the first thing I thought of -- isn't it Electra 5000 ? and yes, i hear it's got a poor wax adhereance.

[tex1230]

Classic Madd 158 speckle.

Magic base fastness :)

+1 ...that board was stupid fast

[John Bell]

Interesting.

OK, I'll fess to something really stupid: I once waxed my board with paraffin, thinking wax is wax and that special ski/board wax is a marketing gimmick. Well, guess what. It ain't. The board was slow as a piece of cheese moving through an octogenarian's intestine. Fortuantely, most of the wax cracked off by midday.

[nekdut]

that was the first thing I thought of -- isn't it Electra 5000 ? and yes, i hear it's got a poor wax adhereance.

I have no idea what it is but I would love it as a base material on all of my boards. Once it has a decent wax job, it is lightning on almost any surface, at least under my non-racer feet.

It is a major pain to wax though. It takes many slow low heat passes to get wax to absorb. The WaxWhizard unfortunately does not seem to work well on a base this hard. Mike D from PTC commented that it took him a LOT of work to structure the base properly, and coming from him, that really means something.

[bobdea]

and a couple of models of skis had that super duper base and it is not made anymore

it was and as far as I know is the hardest base material ever on the market

Electra is a different animal, the original electra was really soft I there is a harder one now.

there are bases with metals to help keep the bases cool, burton uses indium bases

here's some good reading, check out the PDF downloads http://www.gurit.com/product.asp?section=0001000100130005&itemTitle=Extruded+and+press-sintered+running+bases

[bobdea]

Does anyone know?

This site says it's P-Tex 4000, but it doesn't address the 7200 and 8000 I've also heard about--not to mention Burton's "WFO", Whatever the FO that is:

http://people.bath.ac.uk/cjht20/Advanced%20Engineering%20Materials%20for%20Sports%20Equipment.htm

And what about DuraSurf?

ohh yeah, forgot to mention, certain companies like rossignol like to use their own numbers trying to trick you into thinking they use higher grade bases numbers like 8000

http://www.durasurf.com/products.htm

[LeeW]

with that in mind, im gonna have a converstation with fin and see if i can test his madd 158 and compare it with mine to feel the "differences."

[Victory]

The Iso NANO Speed base is the fastest that I've ever experimented with. You really notice a difference when you get down in the flats, especially at the bottom of a racecourse. Of course, a waxed and tuned Sintered 2000 is still faster than an unwaxed graphite base.

[nils]

Gurit 4000 electra ( 4000 E) is the fastest in consumer market.

Gurit 4000 R for racing is one that is available in very small quantities for small series of race WC skiis. ( E has about 11% graphite, and R about 22%)

- Isosport and other 8000+ are almost same with different names ( galium, nano etc...)...numbers look higher, but in definitive, its the molecular weight and the graphite that makes the difference it seems.

N

[bobdea]

isospeed info http://www.isosport.com/english/ski/pt1.html?grpid=10

[queequeg]

Interesting.

OK, I'll fess to something really stupid: I once waxed my board with paraffin, thinking wax is wax and that special ski/board wax is a marketing gimmick. Well, guess what. It ain't. The board was slow as a piece of cheese moving through an octogenarian's intestine. Fortuantely, most of the wax cracked off by midday.

I did this too! Hah ... that was a brilliant idea ...

[www.oldsnowboards.com]

What ever it is Mike leveraged out of his R&D buddies in their top secret labs and put on the bottom of my Tinkler. Like squeezing a water mellon seed between two fingers fast. Like, suckin the snot right out of your nose fast!!

Like somebuddy got a rill to slow this shzt down fast? Fast enough ok. Never seems to be a problem on my boards. Wax them, treat them right and no is passing you while pointing it, that's for sure:p

[Donek]

There are basically 3 different base manufacturers in the World.

Durasurf is in the US and produces a lot of the material used in FS and FR boards. It is extremely hard and is considered sintered. It is, however, produced in a continuous compression molding process. My understanding is that PE resin pellets are heated and fed through rollers to produce continuous sheets of any desired length. Most tuners find this material to absorb less wax than materials sintered by conventional means. Riders grinding rails really like it for it's durability. Crown (durasurf) offers a graphite material for race purposes, but the World Cup tuners I've worked with don't typically like it as much as the competition.

ISO Sport (in Europe) is probably responsible for more base material production than any other producer. I believe their graphite material is an 8000 series material, but it's been so long since I purchased any ISO material I can't be sure. Iso Sport uses a conventional sintering process in which pelletes are heated and compressed as a log and then skived off the log to produce roll stock. I have not spoken directly with an ISO rep, but have been told that they produce only ski width material this way. In order to make snowboard width material, they weld the rolls together before sanding and flame treating the material. Of the tuners I've worked with, some really like the ISO sport material and find it very comparable to PTEX.

PTEX is a brand produced in Europe. They are typically the benchmark by which all others are compared. Most tuners and racers in my experience prefer the 4000 Electra. This is what is requested at the World cup and olympic levels of racing. IMS (PTEX) produces full snowboard width logs of sintered material and skive the log to produce rolls of material. In my experience the material is the most dimensionally stable available, but it does come at a price.

There are a lot of misconceptions about base material and what is better. Frequently you will hear that one is better than the other without any real qualifyer. Many have heard that 4000 Electra is the best and believe that to mean it is the hardest or toughest material. In fact, the additiona of graphite or carbon to base material makes it softer and more prone to scratching. It also requires more time tuning and maintaining to acheive the additional speed that can be coaxed from the material. An entire book can and probably has been written on this subject.

The fastest base materials (such as 4000E) typically require the most amount of tuning effort to get the best results. The hardest materials such as Durasurf 2001 will frequently provide acceptable (by a jibbers standards) results without any maintenance whatsoever.

Hopefully this has helped a bit.

[John Bell]

Thanks a lot, Sean. That does clear things up perfectly. You're one of probably a handful of people who can authoritatively comment not only on the riding characteristics but on the manufacturing methods as well. So I appreciate it.

I just wish all the various brands would use the same terms. Or that there were some objective scale of slipperiness, as there are for hardness (Vickers and Rockwell scales).

--John

PS--Does anyone know what the difference is between DuraJet and DuraSurf? (Sean probably knows but may be tired of typing.)

[abakker]

i am really interested in the original madd speckled base. does anybody actually know what it was? there seems to be no real info on this forum. it seems that it was described as hard to tune, and just really really hard. i have several accounts of riding straight over rocks and not getting scratches.

i'd be willing to pay extra to get that base material on the bottom of a custom board. especially one that i would use anywhere near rocks and thin conditions.

[bobdea]

i am really interested in the original madd speckled base. does anybody actually know what it was? there seems to be no real info on this forum. it seems that it was described as hard to tune, and just really really hard. i have several accounts of riding straight over rocks and not getting scratches.

i'd be willing to pay extra to get that base material on the bottom of a custom board. especially one that i would use anywhere near rocks and thin conditions.

according to John Gilmour they don't make the stuff anymore, he was involved with Madd back in the day. If I remember correctly.

email him for more info because I don't want to put words in his mouth

[Donek]

PS--Does anyone know what the difference is between DuraJet and DuraSurf? (Sean probably knows but may be tired of typing.)

Durajet and durasurf are both crown materials. Durasurf is the standard base they produce. Durajet is the graphite material they produce. It is just the durasurf with the additive. Crown makes their 2001 base material and at one time produced a 4000 series material The 4000 was, from what I heard, too hard to be effectively tuned.

[Donek]

i am really interested in the original madd speckled base. does anybody actually know what it was? there seems to be no real info on this forum. it seems that it was described as hard to tune, and just really really hard. i have several accounts of riding straight over rocks and not getting scratches.

i'd be willing to pay extra to get that base material on the bottom of a custom board. especially one that i would use anywhere near rocks and thin conditions.

Most specled materials were produced from regrind. I believe the materail was a 5000 grade IMS (PTEX) material, but I'm working of some old memories. If durability is really important to you, I can check to see if there is any old Crown 4000 material around. It may be possible to get enough to make a board for you.

[nils]

5000 IMS? never heard of it... are u sure there was a 5000 sean?

The next vast topic is base surfacing and texturing....and there is vast debates here too...here is what we think ( so its our opinion, and shall not be regarded as a rule etc...)

From the first boards we made in 2002 with the 4000E besides all the early protos etc... we have noticed that using stone grind reduces speed and board versatility. We have tested various stone grinds compare to "old" belt grinds and are now sure ( again OUR opinion) that stone grind is not something we want on our freecarving board that require lateral ability as well as forward move. We are tuning each time when possible with old sand belts to reach the finest finish we can achieve, and its way smaller than what the smallest stone gives. Using stone grind locks the ability of slided turns and the board is often harder to turn at slow speed. Its like stone patterns lock the board.

The problem is edge sharpening, that a belt is not good at, and i believe this is the main reason why so many people swear about stone grinds today: it makes base flat, and it makes edges really flat too.... so what....

I resharp the edge manually anyway, and if my base is not perfectly flat it does not affect my ride so...big deal.

I think the whole market has been overtaken by the marketing of wintersteiger move toward stone machines that are way more expensive machines... and this "progress" toward flat base/flat edges/stone patterns" has a big cost when it comes to board gliding speed and agility.... Of course on wet spring snow, then the patterns comes handy and really work.. but how many days do i need a wet snow pattern on my board...

On our three generation of boards, we've had fine belt, fine stone, and now back to finest belt and we can say the new finish glides better... Jacques said he felt the lateral agility was about 100% better than with stone...

THis is our experience with it....One last thing with 4000E is that it requires very few tuning appart from graphite waxing. Its strong and as Sean stated is not so easy to repair when damaged because wax candles are 2000 ptex without graphite, and they do not mix with the 4000E that good and tend to come off.

I'm curious of what other experiences are toward stone/belt and various topics.... ( not in racing view that is totally different from what u need in freecarving..).. sorry for the slight off topic btw

Nils

[nils]

would like to hear input of racers like bordy or freecarving riders regarding this last question ( structuring/surfacing)...nothing scientific in our observation, but its a real observation on our boards that are indeed softer flex than others, so might be a reason why we saw these differences.......thnx

N.

[pokkis]

I think this is also related where you ride, higher on mountains or closer to see level where snow is naturally not so dry, or area where most of snow is man made. So i think ther eis no one clear thruth as such.