Showing posts with label Smile-EN. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Smile-EN. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 10, 2026

Why Do Mohair Skins Need Care? – Skin Skis Aren't Completely Maintenance-Free

⛷️
SKIING WITH A SMILE · WHEN SKIS MISBEHAVE
Why Do Mohair Skins Need Care?
SKIN SKI MAINTENANCE

Why Do Mohair Skins Need Care?

One of the greatest advantages of modern skin skis is that we don't have to worry about choosing the right kick wax before every outing.

Blue, violet or red?

Hard wax or klister?

How many layers, and where exactly should they go?

Mohair skins take care of much of this for us.

But there's one small catch.

Skin skis don't need traditional kick waxing. That doesn't mean they require no maintenance at all.

Monday, November 9, 2026

How to Choose Skis with the Right Base – Part 3: Colour, Ageing and Ski Base Care

⛷️
SKIING WITH A SMILE · THREE-PART SERIES
How to Choose Skis with the Right Base
PART 3 OF 3

How to Choose Skis with the Right Base – Part 3: Colour, Ageing and Ski Base Care

In Part 1, we explained why the material and manufacturing process of a ski base deserve our attention when choosing cross-country skis.

In Part 2, we looked at graphite, other additives and how they may influence ski base properties.

So by now, we should know how to choose the perfect skis.

But what if even a very good ski base doesn't last forever?

What if its properties change because of sunlight, material ageing, mechanical wear or even our own maintenance procedures?

And what if buying a good pair of skis turns out to be only the beginning?

Unfortunately, I have some unpleasant news.

Even a good ski base needs proper care.

How to Choose Skis with the Right Base – Part 2: What's Hiding in a Black Ski Base?

⛷️
SKIING WITH A SMILE · THREE-PART SERIES
How to Choose Skis with the Right Base
PART 2 OF 3

How to Choose Skis with the Right Base – Part 2: What's Hiding in a Black Ski Base?

In Part 1, we explained why buying cross-country skis involves more than choosing a famous brand and beautiful graphics. We should pay particular attention to the actual ski base.

We also looked at extruded and sintered bases and the main types of polyethylene.

And we concluded that even expensive skis from a famous manufacturer aren't automatically a good purchase.

But perhaps you noticed something interesting.

Most high-quality cross-country skis have black bases.

Why?

Is black faster?

And if black is so wonderful, why do manufacturers also produce transparent and coloured bases?

The answer is a little more complicated than it might seem.

Because a ski base isn't always made from polyethylene alone. And neither its colour, the number of grooves nor a beautiful surface structure can guarantee good glide.

How to Choose Skis with the Right Base – Part 1: Don't Be Blinded by the Brand

⛷️
SKIING WITH A SMILE · THREE-PART SERIES
How to Choose Skis with the Right Base
PART 1 OF 3

How to Choose Skis with the Right Base – Part 1: Don't Be Blinded by the Brand

A new skiing season is approaching, so let's start with a bang!

Do you have several children and find yourself buying new skiing equipment before almost every winter?

Skis, boots, poles, bindings...

And just when you've finally bought everything, the children grow again.

We adults have at least one advantage in this respect.

We've stopped growing.

Well, at least vertically. 😀

Does the thought of how much all this will cost make you nervous? And do you sometimes worry that buying another pair of skis might turn out to be another expensive mistake?

Then let me begin with one simple recommendation.

Don't be blinded by the brand.

Thursday, November 5, 2026

Which Ski Wax Brand Should You Choose?

And what do ski waxes have in common with cars?

There are so many kick waxes, glide waxes, treatments, brushes, waxing irons and other accessories on the market today that a beginner can easily become completely lost.

And not just a beginner.

That's why I recommend one simple thing when you're starting out: Choose one manufacturer, one brand, and gradually learn how to work with its waxing system.

You don't need to combine ten different brands, compare fifty products or search for some miraculous mixture that nobody has discovered before you.

You can do all that later.

And believe me, if ski waxing really gets under your skin, you probably will. 😀

But which brand should you choose?

My answer is surprisingly simple:

Choose the one you like.

The one that appeals to you for some reason. Its history, philosophy, products, technical approach or perhaps simply the way it presents itself.

Because a properly selected and applied wax from any established manufacturer can work extremely well.

And even the most expensive wax in the world won't help if you choose the wrong product for the snow conditions.

To make your decision a little easier, I've put together some short portraits of the different manufacturers.

But be warned!

Don't expect an objective comparative test.

What follows is entirely subjective, based on my personal experience, preferences and, occasionally, prejudices.

And because I happen to like cars almost as much as skis, I've taken the liberty of comparing ski wax brands with car manufacturers.

So let's take a little tour through the world of ski waxes!

SWIX – The Volkswagen of Ski Wax

In the world of ski waxes and ski-service equipment, SWIX is rather like the Volkswagen Group in the automotive industry.

A large, powerful and exceptionally well-organized manufacturer.

Tradition. Research. Development. Technology. Marketing. A huge product range.

SWIX offers practically everything you could need to prepare your skis, from basic recreational waxes to high-end racing products and professional workshop equipment.

Its product lines are clearly organized according to their intended use and price level.

Value for money is generally very reasonable. Quality is high, and the overall system is well developed.

But much like Volkswagen, I sometimes find it lacking a little individuality.

Everything is correct. Everything works. Everything has its proper place in the catalogue.

Yet sometimes it all feels a little too similar.

To me, SWIX is first and foremost a highly capable industrial manufacturer and commercial organization.

Research, development and technical expertise are certainly there. But the final products also have to make commercial sense.

And if you happen to love technology for its own sake, you may find yourself missing a little romance.

SWIX is Volkswagen. An excellent rational choice. But it may not always make your heart beat faster.

RODE – The Alfa Romeo of Ski Wax

RODE is almost the perfect opposite of SWIX.

A smaller, family-owned Italian company with a long tradition, a distinctive character and products that seem to carry a little Italian passion inside them.

To me, RODE is Alfa Romeo.

Tradition. Style. Elegance. Emotion.

And above all, a matter of the heart.

Of course, it doesn't have the same financial and research resources as the largest international manufacturers.

But like Alfa Romeo, it offers something that cannot easily be expressed in technical specifications or financial indicators.

Character.

I particularly appreciate RODE's traditional kick waxes and klisters.

Each product seems to have a personality of its own.

Some of these waxes feel almost like small technological originals that have earned their place in experienced ski technicians' waxing boxes over decades of use.

And yes, occasionally you may encounter a little peculiarity.

But does anyone really buy an Alfa Romeo because it's the most perfectly rational choice in every respect?

RODE is for people who appreciate a little history, elegance and passion alongside good skis.

HOLMENKOL – The Mercedes-Benz of Ski Wax

German quality, technical precision, a long tradition and a strong commitment to research.

HOLMENKOL is definitely Mercedes-Benz in my book.

Well-designed products. Quality manufacturing. A technological approach.

And occasionally, perhaps, just a touch of overengineering.

Everything must be precisely defined, explained, properly classified and supported by technical reasoning.

Sometimes you get the impression that before waxing your skis, you should attend a short training course at the company's development department.

But once you understand the system, it works very well.

HOLMENKOL has also produced certain waxes that are hard to forget.

I still remember its yellow hard kick wax particularly well.

Under certain snow conditions, it was an exceptional product in my experience.

And much like Mercedes-Benz, you generally know what you're paying for.

The price may not be the lowest, but the quality and technical background are convincing.

HOLMENKOL is Mercedes-Benz. Precise, reliable and technically sophisticated. Although sometimes I wouldn't mind a little more Italian temperament.

TOKO – Volkswagen's Swiss Relative

TOKO is a traditional Swiss brand that today belongs to the same corporate group as SWIX.

And now our automotive analogy becomes a little more complicated.

Imagine a brand with its own history and identity that gradually became part of a large industrial group.

Rather like another member of the Volkswagen family.

TOKO has a strong reputation in alpine ski and snowboard preparation, but it also offers products for cross-country skiing.

The quality is good. The products are technically refined. The range is broad and easy to understand.

Nevertheless, I've never developed the same personal attachment to TOKO that I have to brands such as RODE, REX or START.

Perhaps because I feel that classic cross-country skiing isn't the one and only world around which the entire brand revolves.

Or perhaps that's simply my prejudice.

Either way, TOKO works.

It just doesn't particularly excite me.

TOKO is a high-quality, rational choice. But if I'm looking for a little Nordic soul in cross-country skiing, I tend to look elsewhere.

REX – The Subaru of Ski Wax

REX is a traditional Finnish manufacturer whose history goes back to 1952.

A family business, Nordic toughness, an independent approach and, above all, deep roots in cross-country skiing.

REX reminds me of Subaru.

Not because its waxes have all-wheel drive.

But because, much like Subaru, REX has developed its own path, its own technical philosophy and a remarkably loyal group of enthusiasts.

Subaru has its boxer engines, its AWD systems and its rather distinctive personality.

REX has its own formulations, technical approaches and experience from demanding Nordic snow conditions.

And like Subaru, REX isn't a brand you choose merely by reading advertising brochures.

There's a certain independence about it.

Perhaps a little stubbornness, too.

And above all, a genuine connection with what it makes.

In recent years, REX has continued developing its product ranges and responding to the new demands of fluorine-free ski preparation.

For me, it's definitely a matter of the heart.

REX is Subaru. A little different, a little stubborn, but tremendously likeable. And perfectly at home in Nordic conditions.

START – My Personal Number One

And now we come to the brand I probably feel closest to.

START.

A Finnish manufacturer that, in my opinion, has long been one of the most interesting names in cross-country ski preparation.

And yet its packaging has always made me smile a little.

Don't let it put you off.

Some START products look as though somebody discovered them during a clearance sale in an old East German wholesale warehouse.

But inside, you often find an excellent wax.

And that is what matters.

What I appreciate most about START is its technical expertise, its well-thought-out product system and its ability to offer quality solutions for a wide range of skiers.

From recreational beginners and experienced enthusiasts to competitive athletes.

I've personally had particularly good experiences with its kick waxes, but also with many of its glide products.

Of course, there are other outstanding brands on the market, and I cannot claim that START is objectively the best under every condition.

But for me personally, START is number one.

In 2025, the brand also underwent an important business transition, with a new Finnish company, Start Skiwax Oy, taking over its continuation.

It will be interesting to see how the brand develops from here.

But there's something I can already say today.

If someone asked me to recommend one brand with which to begin and gradually build their own cross-country ski waxing system, START would be among my very first suggestions.

And which car manufacturer would I compare it with?

This time I'll make an exception.

START is simply START.

And that's quite enough for me.

VAUHTI – Finnish Tradition That Never Grew Old

Another representative of the Finnish ski wax industry.

And certainly not just any manufacturer.

VAUHTI is among the longest-established names in ski waxing.

And it's no coincidence that it comes from Finland.

A country where cross-country skiing is not merely a sport, but almost part of the national identity.

VAUHTI combines a long tradition with modern research and development.

Its range includes products for recreational skiers, dedicated enthusiasts and racing applications.

The company also places considerable emphasis on modern fluorine-free technologies.

In some parts of Europe, VAUHTI may still seem a little exotic.

But perhaps that's just another reason to take an interest in it.

After all, Finnish brands often share an interesting characteristic.

They tend to be rather understated.

They don't necessarily need to create a great circus around themselves.

They simply make quality products for people who actually use them.

And I rather like that approach.

VAUHTI is a piece of Finnish skiing history that still has plenty to offer. And a little Nordic exoticism never hurt anybody.

OPTIWAX – Downsizing in the Ski Wax Industry

And yet another Finnish brand.

But this time with a rather different philosophy.

OPTIWAX puts a strong emphasis on simplicity and speed of ski preparation.

Less time waxing.

More time skiing.

That certainly sounds attractive.

And for many recreational skiers, it may be an excellent approach.

But I have a little problem with this philosophy.

It reminds me of downsizing in the automotive industry.

A small engine.

Small displacement.

Fewer cylinders.

And a turbocharger is supposed to make up for everything.

Yes, it can work.

But do I have to like it?

Not necessarily.

Among other things, OPTIWAX offers special wax application tapes that transfer wax to the ski base without the traditional process of ironing in a block of glide wax.

Technically, it's an interesting solution.

But I must admit that I personally prefer working with traditional wax and the ski base itself.

I like being able to influence the individual preparation steps.

Temperature.

Amount of wax.

Application method.

Brushing and final surface preparation.

For some people, that's unnecessary complication.

For me, it's part of the pleasure of ski servicing.

That certainly doesn't mean OPTIWAX makes bad products.

Its waxes, blocks and other treatments can be very interesting.

Its philosophy simply isn't quite my cup of tea.

To me, OPTIWAX is downsizing. It can certainly work. But no turbocharger can completely replace engine displacement and a proper number of cylinders.

MAPLUS – Italian Racing Chemistry

MAPLUS is an Italian brand with a strong technological focus on racing ski preparation.

It is associated with MA-FRA, and its history is also connected with the BRIKO brand.

MAPLUS built its reputation on specialized glide treatments, including, historically, highly fluorinated racing waxes.

Fluorinated technology was once an important part of its competition-oriented product range.

But times have changed.

With restrictions on problematic fluorinated chemicals and the subsequent prohibition of fluorinated waxes in FIS competitions, the entire racing ski wax industry had to move towards different solutions.

So it would no longer be accurate to describe MAPLUS solely through its historical fluorinated products.

The brand also offers fluorine-free glide waxes and other ski preparation equipment.

To me, though, MAPLUS still represents a technically focused specialist with a distinctly racing-oriented character.

Less romance.

More chemistry.

More technical specifications.

And perhaps a little Italian obsession with performance.

MAPLUS is an Italian racing specialist. Not everyone needs it in their waxing box, but it certainly deserves attention.

SKIGO – When a Racer Makes Ski Wax

And finally, Sweden.

SKIGO is a brand whose identity is closely associated with former elite cross-country skier Christer Majbäck.

And that is something I find particularly appealing.

Unlike large industrial corporations, what I see here is above all the experience of someone who has devoted a substantial part of his life to cross-country skiing.

Racing experience.

Testing under real conditions.

Practical knowledge of snow.

And a lifelong interest in skiing.

Of course, that doesn't mean SKIGO products are developed without laboratory research, or that personal experience can replace objective measurements.

But I consider the connection between real racing experience and product development extremely valuable.

With brands like this, I have the feeling that products aren't created merely to fill another space in a catalogue.

They're also created because the people behind them understand what those products need to do out on the snow.

And that matters to me.

SKIGO is a brand with a strong personal story. If you appreciate products backed by real people and their experience, it's definitely worth trying.

So Which Brand Should You Choose?

After reading all these descriptions, I may disappoint you a little.

Because my recommendation is exactly the same as it was at the beginning.

Choose the brand you like.

One whose product system you understand.

One you can gradually learn to work with.

And one whose products suit your needs, your experience and, of course, your budget.

There's no reason to believe that a single manufacturer makes the best waxes for every imaginable condition.

And there's certainly no need to own the complete catalogues of several different manufacturers.

Start with a small selection of well-chosen products.

Learn to recognize snow conditions.

Observe what works and what doesn't.

Experiment.

Compare.

And gradually develop your own experience.

Because even the world's best wax can be completely useless when applied incorrectly.

And with an ordinary wax you know well, you may prepare surprisingly fast skis.

And if you still want to know my personal choice?

START.

But if you choose RODE, I'll understand completely.

After all, an Alfa Romeo isn't exactly a car you buy with your head alone. 😀

And if you go for REX?

Then perhaps we'll meet somewhere on the snow, like two happy Subaru owners.

Because at the end of the day, the most important thing isn't the brand of wax. It's how beautifully your skis glide.

Why Shouldn't We Use Universal Kick Waxes?

One wax for every type of snow? You can't be serious!

We don't do this very often in our articles, but today we're going to take a stand against an entire category of kick waxes. The so-called universal kick waxes.

Fortunately, this isn't a particularly large group of products. Nevertheless, the embarrassment they bring upon kick waxing, at least in my opinion, would be enough to make several rather impressive coats.

Why such a harsh and uncompromising attitude?

To understand why I find the very idea of a universal kick wax so foolish, we need to take a little detour first.

And talk about snow.

Snow. One Word, Infinitely Many Forms.

Snow.

One simple word describing an almost inexhaustible variety of shapes, structures and continuous transformations, driven by a practically endless combination of weather conditions and other influences.

There's a familiar story that Inuit people have countless different words for snow. Linguistically, the reality is somewhat more complicated, but the underlying point remains: people who live with snow know very well that snow is not just one single thing.

The rest of us, fortunately, have our wonderful sense of order.

We use it to organize the cosmic chaos that probably frightens us far too much to attempt to understand it as it truly is.

And so we try to classify snow and its countless forms into tidy, manageable categories.

We might begin with new snow, or freshly fallen snow.

But even the category of “new snow” contains an astonishing range of possibilities.

One kind of fresh snow falls at temperatures close to freezing, when large, heavy flakes drift down from the sky, formed by clusters of smaller snow crystals.

Completely different fresh snow falls at temperatures far below freezing, when fragile crystals with sharp edges and beautifully defined shapes float through the air.

And as if that weren't enough, snow begins to change almost immediately after it forms and settles on the ground.

Fragile crystals break, deform and rearrange themselves. They respond to temperature, temperature gradients, moisture, sunlight, wind and mechanical loading.

Some crystals become rounded. Others retain their sharp outlines for a while. Snow may compact, form larger aggregates, become wetter or remain extremely dry and brittle.

Sometimes it rustles pleasantly beneath your skis.

Sometimes it squeaks, crunches or even cracks.

And yes, we're still talking about new or relatively freshly fallen snow.

Does anyone still believe that this entire range of shapes, structures and transformations can be reliably handled by one single substance?

If so, they're either completely mad or have looked so far behind the curtain of human knowledge that everyone will consider them mad anyway.

Universal Wax? For Absolutely Everything?

Yet universal kick waxes often don't restrict their claims to just one category of snow.

Some promise to work across an astonishingly wide range of conditions.

From fresh, fine-grained snow through old, transformed snow to coarse-grained or icy surfaces.

From freezing powder snow to wet spring snow.

And these very conditions may require fundamentally different properties from the kick-wax layer.

Sometimes we need a relatively hard wax; at other times, something soft and compliant. Under certain conditions, the mechanical engagement of sharp snow crystals is essential. Under others, adhesion, viscoelastic behavior or liquid water play a significant role.

And so I can't help feeling that some universal waxes are trying to play God.

And false prophets have always been driven out with a whip...

All right. Before we start driving anyone out, perhaps we should explain one more little thing.

How is a good kick wax actually supposed to work?

Good Kick Wax: Grip, but Don't Stick!

We apply kick wax to the grip zone of classic cross-country skis to achieve a reliable kick that allows us to move forward.

Unfortunately, a good kick depends on a whole range of different factors.

Ski stiffness, length and camber. The skier's body weight. Kick technique. The length and position of the grip zone. The condition and structure of the snow.

And, of course, choosing the right kick wax.

Many of these factors are difficult for beginners to influence.

Which makes it even more important to focus on those they can control.

And choosing the right kick wax is one of them.

In principle, anyone who can read and write should be capable of that.

Or at least anyone who can read. 😀

But how does good kick wax work?

During the kick, when the skier sufficiently loads one ski and presses its grip zone against the snow, the contact between snow and wax must provide enough resistance to prevent backward slipping.

During the following glide, however, we want that same contact to offer as little resistance to forward movement as possible.

In simple terms:

During the kick, the wax must grip. During the glide, it must let go.

And that is where the magic happens.

With harder kick waxes and suitable types of snow, sharp snow crystals can penetrate the wax layer and become mechanically engaged within it.

When the ski is unloaded, this contact must release easily enough.

If the wax is too hard and the snow crystals cannot engage effectively during the kick, the ski slips backward.

If the wax is too soft or sticky, it may create excessive resistance during the glide.

Under certain conditions, snow can also accumulate on the wax, forming those delightful frozen lumps beneath the ski.

With klisters and wet or transformed snow, the mechanism becomes more complex. Alongside mechanical interactions, the adhesive and viscoelastic properties of the grip layer play an important role.

But the fundamental requirement remains unchanged.

A reliable kick combined with as little interference with glide as possible.

Two requirements that partially contradict each other.

And between them, we're trying to find the best possible compromise.

One Wax Against Infinitely Many Types of Snow

Now imagine once again our nearly infinite variety of snow conditions.

Fresh snow with sharp crystals.

Old, fine-grained snow.

Coarse-grained, transformed snow.

Hard, icy surfaces.

Wet spring snow saturated with water.

And let's add different temperatures, humidity levels, mechanical loads and continuous changes in snow structure over the course of a single day.

Now please explain how one single wax formulation could achieve the optimal balance between kick and glide under all these conditions.

How can the same material simultaneously be hard enough for one set of conditions, soft enough for another and sufficiently adhesive and viscoelastic for a third?

Of course, we can develop a wax that performs acceptably across a certain relatively broad range of snow conditions.

That's a perfectly legitimate engineering objective.

And sometimes a very useful one.

But an acceptable compromise is not the same as an optimal solution.

And versatility within a defined range of conditions certainly doesn't mean universality across every imaginable type of snow.

That's why I consider blind faith in universal kick waxes rather foolish.

Anyone expecting one single wax to provide equally reliable grip and excellent glide on fresh powder, an icy crust and water-saturated spring snow is either extraordinarily optimistic...

...or manufactures universal kick waxes.

Although I rather suspect even the manufacturers don't truly believe it.

The Exception That Proves the Rule?

To be fair, however, I must mention one product that I certainly wouldn't condemn merely because it has the word “Universal” in its name.

RODE Universal Multigrade Klister.

Under certain conditions, a truly excellent klister.

It can work extremely well across a relatively broad range of transformed, coarse-grained or damp snow conditions.

And that is precisely the point.

It isn't some miraculous substance capable of solving every imaginable snow condition.

It's a high-quality product designed for a particular, albeit fairly broad, range of applications.

And that is something entirely different.

In fact, if we wanted to be perfectly consistent, almost every kick wax is universal to some extent.

After all, no wax works exclusively at one precisely defined temperature, humidity level and snow structure.

The difference lies in how broad its useful operating range is and what compromise between kick and glide it makes along the way.

So Why Shouldn't We Use Universal Kick Waxes?

Because snow isn't universal.

Because conditions are constantly changing.

And because good kick wax must match the actual condition of the snow, not merely an attractive word printed on the packaging.

If a universal wax works well under your particular conditions, there's absolutely no reason to reject it.

But if you expect it to provide reliable kick and excellent glide under every imaginable set of conditions, you're probably heading for an unpleasant surprise sooner or later.

Perhaps on the very first climb.

Or perhaps on the very first descent.

A wax doesn't have to be universal. It has to be the right one.

And true universality that works absolutely everywhere?

For now, I'll leave that to the gods.

And the manufacturers of universal kick waxes. 😀

How to Start Cross-Country Skiing in Civilization – For Beginners Who Don't Want to Overthink It

For beginners who don't want to overthink it.

Would you like to try cross-country skiing, but the last thing you want is a long and complicated preparation? You don't feel like studying theory, choosing ski waxes, comparing equipment or spending your evenings watching technical videos?

You just want to give it a try. And then see what happens...

I understand. Completely.

So I have just one question:

Are you staying at a ski resort, or somewhere in the middle of nowhere, far away from civilization?

The Answer: In Civilization!

Excellent. If you are at a ski resort with groomed cross-country trails, I have four simple recommendations:

  • Rent a pair of cross-country skis.
  • Have them properly prepared.
  • Start with classic skiing.
  • If it's snowing around the freezing point, consider choosing another day – or suitable skis that don't require traditional kick waxing.

And that, really, could be the end of our little guide.

Except that I would have to trust you to follow my advice. And since beginners sometimes display a surprising amount of courage, we'd better explain a few things first.

1. Ski Rental: Why Make Life Complicated?

Renting is the simplest and usually the cheapest way to get suitable equipment when trying cross-country skiing for the first time.

You don't have to worry about ski length, stiffness, binding systems or whether your boots will fit. Someone who knows what they're doing can take care of all that.

At least, let's hope so.

For classic skiing, choosing skis that match your body weight and ability is particularly important. Skis that are too stiff may make it difficult for a beginner to get a reliable kick, while skis that are too soft can compromise glide.

And a reliable kick is one of the basic requirements for actually enjoying your first day on skis.

If the rental shop offers classic skin skis – with a grip strip under the foot – seriously consider choosing them.

They eliminate the need to select and apply traditional kick wax. However, they still need to be properly fitted and maintained.

2. Ski Service: So You'll Have Someone to Blame

If you rent traditional waxable classic skis, leave the preparation to someone who really understands ski waxing.

A good kick wax should achieve two things:

  • Reliable grip for pushing forward and climbing hills.
  • Reasonably good glide without excessive sticking or snow build-up.

Without a reliable kick, moving forward as a beginner can be surprisingly difficult.

And if the wax starts sticking or icing up, you might stop moving forward altogether.

Trust me. I know what I'm talking about.

That's why, whenever possible, you should leave the job to the professionals.

At least you'll have someone to blame if it all goes wrong anyway.

Skin skis don't require traditional kick wax, which makes them an excellent option for beginners. However, they are not entirely maintenance-free, and even their grip strips can ice up under difficult conditions.

3. Classic Skiing: The Respectable Lady Shuffle

For your first cross-country skiing experience, I would recommend the classic technique.

It has one enormous advantage: you don't have to look like a professional athlete from your very first minute on skis.

Classic skiing can also be performed using a technique I like to call “the respectable lady shuffle.”

You simply move slowly through the winter landscape.

On flat terrain, you shuffle one foot forward and then the other. If the skis provide sufficient grip, you can gradually introduce short gliding movements as well.

On gentle climbs, you continue in much the same way, only shortening your steps. On steeper hills, you shorten them even more or use the herringbone technique when necessary.

And once you've finally made it to the top?

Here comes your reward.

If your skis glide properly and the kick wax isn't collecting snow, you can enjoy that wonderful part of cross-country skiing when you no longer have to work quite so hard.

Going downhill!

Of course, start with a gentle, open and safe slope. Learn how to slow down and stop before attempting anything remotely resembling a serious descent.

And the result?

A lovely winter day, new experiences on the trail, beautiful snowy scenery and perhaps something delicious to eat at a mountain café – maybe even at Hřebínek in the Jizera Mountains.

That is more or less my idea of a perfect first day on cross-country skis.

4. Snowing Around Freezing? Watch Out!

And now for one particularly important piece of advice.

Fresh, slightly damp or wet snow around the freezing point creates some of the most challenging conditions for reliable kick waxing.

Why?

Because sometimes a tiny change in temperature, humidity or snow structure is enough to turn a perfectly functioning kick wax into something that sticks, ices up or suddenly stops providing grip.

It's no coincidence that ski wax manufacturers offer numerous different kick waxes, klisters and combinations for these conditions.

Finding the right solution can be difficult even for experienced ski technicians.

And that is precisely why I would advise beginners using traditionally waxed skis to avoid these conditions whenever possible.

With suitable skin skis, things may be considerably easier. That doesn't mean, however, that they work perfectly in every type of weather.

If you want your first experience to be as uncomplicated as possible, choose a day with more stable snow and temperature conditions.

Unless, of course, you're a passionate believer in the following philosophy:

“It doesn't matter what kind of experience it is, as long as it's intense!”

Because stomping along beside the ski tracks – or right in the middle of them – with enormous frozen lumps of snow attached to your skis will certainly qualify as an intense experience.

I'm just not entirely convinced it's the experience you were hoping for on your very first day of cross-country skiing.

So, Once Again: How Do You Start Cross-Country Skiing in Civilization?

A rental shop, properly selected skis, good preparation, classic technique and reasonably favorable snow conditions.

No complicated science.

And above all, no unnecessary suffering.

Because your first day on cross-country skis should show you how wonderful it can feel to move through a snow-covered landscape.

And if you enjoy it, next time we can look at how to start cross-country skiing outside civilization.

Now that will be a slightly different story...

Wednesday, November 4, 2026

The Rise and Fall of Fluorinated Ski Waxes – Part III: PFOA/C8 – The Price of Speed

SKIING WITH A SMILE

The Rise and Fall of Fluorinated Ski Waxes

PART III OF IV

PFOA/C8 – The Price of Speed

In the first part of our story, we followed the revolutionary rise of fluorinated ski waxes.

In the second part, we asked a few rather uncomfortable questions.

Did ever-increasing concentrations of fluorinated additives really improve glide?

Was it truly necessary to apply so many different layers of wax?

And were some of the most expensive products primarily very profitable commercial items?

Now we come to an issue far more serious than the price of a packet of fluorinated powder.

Human health and environmental protection.

And once again, to our original theory that ski wax manufacturers might have contributed, at least partly, to the downfall of fluorinated technology.

3. Perfluorooctanoic Acid – PFOA/C8

It is hardly a secret that perfluorooctanoic acid, commonly known as PFOA or C8, is a highly problematic chemical.

The designation C8 refers to the eight carbon atoms in its molecule.

PFOA belongs to the group of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as PFAS.

It is extremely persistent in the environment, and exposure to this substance has been associated with a number of serious health risks.

Or, to put it a little less scientifically:

It is such nasty stuff that the European Union decided to impose major restrictions on it.

Significant European restrictions on PFOA, its salts and related compounds began applying on 4 July 2020.

Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/784 brought these substances under the European regulatory framework for persistent organic pollutants.

Certain exemptions and transitional provisions existed, of course.

But the basic message was unmistakable.

This chemistry could no longer be treated as an ordinary, unproblematic component of industrial production.

Was PFOA the Basis of Every Fluorinated Ski Wax?

An important clarification is necessary here.

PFOA was not the universal main ingredient of all fluorinated ski waxes.

However, it was associated with certain fluorinated products as an unwanted impurity or as a substance that could be formed from particular fluorinated precursors.

Technologies based on long fluorinated chains of the C8 type were particularly problematic.

The European Union therefore did not ban all fluorinated ski waxes without distinction in 2020.

It imposed major restrictions on PFOA and related substances.

For part of the fluorinated ski wax market, this was nevertheless a significant development.

And now things become interesting.

When Chemical Risks Meet a Hot Waxing Iron

Fluorinated substances were used in many different industries.

Racing ski preparation, however, had one particularly unpleasant characteristic.

Waxes were often applied at elevated temperatures, frequently in relatively small waxing rooms.

This was followed by scraping off excess wax, brushing and further mechanical preparation of the ski base.

These activities could generate vapours, aerosols and fine particles containing various fluorinated compounds.

And here we have concrete scientific evidence.

Studies of professional ski wax technicians have documented substantial occupational exposure to PFAS, including PFOA.

A study published in 2010, for example, reported a median PFOA concentration in the blood of the investigated technicians approximately 25 times higher than background levels in the general population.

Other investigations confirmed the presence of fluorinated substances and aerosols in professional ski waxing environments.

Of course, this does not mean that every vapour generated during hot waxing consisted of PFOA.

Nor does it mean that every technician who worked with fluorinated waxes necessarily developed a health condition.

But it does demonstrate that occupational exposure was real and measurable.

And that is deeply troubling.

The people preparing our fastest skis may have been paying for that speed with their own health.

Hardly a cheerful marketing story about gaining a few extra seconds on the racecourse.

And What Was Left Behind in the Snow?

Beyond the working environment, there was another problem.

Environmental contamination.

Wax layers gradually wear away through mechanical contact with the snow.

Some of the material is therefore released into the surrounding snow and may subsequently reach the wider environment.

In the case of persistent fluorinated chemicals, this raises serious concerns.

After all, snow eventually melts.

And the water continues into soil, streams and rivers.

Racing skis should not leave a chemical legacy in the mountains long after the athletes have gone home.

And remember our previous discussion about the durability of expensive fluorinated topcoats.

If part of an expensive finishing layer wears away relatively quickly, we are faced with a remarkable combination.

A very expensive product.

Potentially limited durability.

And additional fluorinated material released into the environment.

This alone does not tell us how much PFOA was released from a particular product.

But it certainly gives us a good reason to ask some uncomfortable questions.

Were Alternatives Available?

And now we come to the heart of our argument.

Alternative fluorinated chemical technologies already existed before the European restrictions on PFOA.

Alongside long-chain C8 chemistry, compounds with shorter fluorinated chains were also developed.

Of course, this does not mean that all these alternatives were automatically safe or environmentally harmless.

They could differ in persistence, mobility, chemical properties and health risks.

Nevertheless, one very interesting question remains:

If fluorinated technologies could be developed without problematic C8 chemistry, why did that chemistry remain in use for so long?

Was it because of technological advantages?

Manufacturing costs?

Raw material availability?

Established production processes?

Or a combination of all these factors?

Without specific information about the manufacturers' decision-making, we cannot honestly claim that money was the only motivation.

But surely nobody should be surprised that such a question comes to mind.

Why Did Change Require Regulatory Pressure?

Following the restrictions on C8 chemistry, alternative formulations and products based on different fluorinated technologies became increasingly important.

Not all these alternatives were developed only after the restrictions.

Research had already been taking place.

However, stricter regulations created a strong incentive for wider adoption.

And this brings us back to our original theory.

Manufacturers undoubtedly played a crucial role in the technological development of fluorinated ski waxes.

At the same time, their products and the ways they were used raised genuine occupational health and environmental concerns.

This does not automatically mean that the manufacturers themselves caused the legislative restrictions on PFOA.

Those restrictions were primarily driven by the risks associated with particular chemicals across multiple industries.

But we can reasonably ask whether an earlier, more decisive transition towards safer solutions might have reduced some of these problems.

And whether commercial interests sometimes stood in the way of technological change.

Which brings us to our rather impolite question:

Could it perhaps have been about money?

We do not know.

But if we want to understand the history of fluorinated ski waxes, we should not be afraid to ask such questions.

What Awaits Us in the Final Part?

In Part I, we followed the rise of fluorinated ski waxes and their extraordinary technological success.

In Part II, we questioned the manufacturers' commercial interests, fluorinated additive concentrations and the actual value of multi-layer waxing.

And in Part III, we reached an issue far more serious than the price of ski wax.

Human health and environmental protection.

Now comes the final step.

We will bring our observations and concerns together.

And try to answer one simple question:

Why should we avoid fluorinated ski waxes?

Perhaps the answer will be much simpler than we might expect.

And perhaps a line from a Czech comedy will help us express it perfectly.

To be continued in Part IV – the final chapter.

Scientific References

The Rise and Fall of Fluorinated Ski Waxes – Part I: No Fluorine, No Victory

SKIING WITH A SMILE

The Rise and Fall of Fluorinated Ski Waxes

PART I OF IV

No fluorine, no victory.

Fluorinated ski waxes are one of the most controversial phenomena in the history of efforts to improve ski glide.

Their story is one of technological revolution, extraordinary sporting performance, enormous commercial success and, ultimately, a dramatic downfall.

But let's start at the beginning.

A Little History

The desire to improve the gliding properties of skis is probably as old as skiing itself.

Back when skis were made entirely of wood, their performance depended heavily on the selection, preparation and protection of the timber.

Water repellency, or hydrophobicity, was particularly important.

A wooden ski exposed to prolonged contact with snow and moisture could absorb water, swell and change its surface properties.

And you can probably imagine that gliding on a swelling wooden ski wasn't exactly a thrilling experience.

When choosing the right wood was no longer enough, our skiing ancestors began looking for substances that could be applied to the surface of their skis.

Various oils, impregnating mixtures and tar-based preparations were used.

Their primary purpose was often to protect the wood against moisture, although they could also affect friction between the ski and snow.

Gradually, natural waxes and paraffin-based products became established.

A technology was emerging that would accompany skiing for many decades to come.

From Paraffin to the Fluorine Revolution

Glide wax development progressed from relatively simple hydrocarbon mixtures to increasingly sophisticated formulations.

Manufacturers began experimenting with various additives designed to improve glide under specific snow conditions.

And then fluorinated technology arrived.

In the late 1980s, highly fluorinated ski treatments began to appear.

Among them was a product that would become legendary: SWIX CERA F.

And this is where our story really begins.

A story of a spectacular rise, extraordinary commercial success and, eventually, a remarkable fall.

A story of technology that changed the rules of the game.

How It All Began

Fluorinated ski waxes were something extraordinary in those days.

Either you had them, or you didn't win.

All right, perhaps that's a slight exaggeration.

But sometimes the difference really did feel that dramatic.

I still remember one particular competition.

We spent almost the entire night preparing our skis.

If I remember correctly, we were combining blue REX with a silicone-based HOLMENKOL product.

We spent several hours just trying to find the right mixing ratio.

Endless work.

Countless experiments.

Another test. Another adjustment. And yet another test.

Meanwhile, our unnamed colleagues from a wealthier ski club went out partying.

And the next morning?

Still suffering from their hangovers, they turned up at the waxing tables, sprinkled a little CERA F onto the bases of their skis and simply polished it in cold.

No all-night experiments.

No complicated alchemy.

No endless testing.

Then we started measuring.

According to the timing gates, their skis produced results that seemed almost impossible to compare with ours.

It wasn't merely a tiny improvement.

The difference felt so enormous that we might as well have been competing in two entirely different disciplines.

At least, that was my first unforgettable experience with fluorinated ski waxes.

Fluorine worked. And it worked damn well!

No Fluorine, No Victory

But there was one rather serious problem.

Fluorinated waxes didn't just deliver extraordinary results.

They also came with extraordinary price tags.

As far as I remember, ordinary hydrocarbon waxes cost something like 10, 12, 15 or 20 West German marks.

And CERA F?

That could cost around 400 marks.

These figures are based on my personal recollection, not on an official historical price list.

But the difference was certainly enormous.

So perhaps our original rule needs a little adjustment:

No fluorine, no victory.

Or, to put it a little more accurately:

No money, no victory!

When a Technological Revolution Becomes a Commercial Gold Rush

At first, the exceptionally high prices of fluorinated ski treatments may have reflected manufacturing costs, research and development, and limited production volumes.

But an extraordinarily successful technology naturally attracts both competitors and commercial opportunities.

More and more fluorinated waxes appeared on the market, offered by different manufacturers with different formulations.

Eventually, several familiar product categories became established:

  • LF – Low Fluor: waxes containing relatively low concentrations of fluorinated additives.
  • HF – High Fluor: waxes containing higher concentrations of fluorinated additives.
  • Fluorinated topcoats: special finishing products, often supplied as powders, blocks or liquids.

Fluorinated technology also began appearing in other ski-service products.

Manufacturers developed increasingly sophisticated ski-preparation systems.

And, of course, an ever-growing number of products that could be recommended for proper preparation.

A little fluorine.

More fluorine.

Even more fluorine.

And finally, a special fluorinated finishing treatment.

Naturally, with a price tag to match.

Everything was running like clockwork.

Give it a little longer, and someone might have started adding fluorine to baby formula!

But Nothing Grows to the Sky

Fluorinated ski waxes were undoubtedly an important technological innovation.

Their performance benefits under certain conditions were real.

But gradually, questions began to emerge that could no longer be ignored.

Did increasing the amount of fluorinated additives always improve glide?

Was it really necessary to apply so many different wax layers?

Did actual performance gains justify ever-increasing prices?

And, above all:

What were the health and environmental consequences of this technological revolution?

These are the questions we will explore in the following parts.

Because, as the saying goes, nothing grows to the sky.

And the story of fluorinated ski waxes was about to take a turn that very few people could have predicted.

To be continued...

The Rise and Fall of Fluorinated Ski Waxes – Part II: Did Greed Dig Its Own Grave?

SKIING WITH A SMILE

The Rise and Fall of Fluorinated Ski Waxes

PART II OF IV

Did greed dig its own grave?

In the first part of our story, we returned to the days when fluorinated ski waxes changed the rules of the game.

We remembered the CERA F revolution, the extraordinary glide performance and the prices that seemed to belong to an entirely different universe from ordinary ski waxes.

Fluorine was everywhere. And better still – it worked!

It worked remarkably well, at least under conditions where fluorinated products offered significant advantages over conventional hydrocarbon waxes.

So what went wrong?

Where did the downfall begin, even during the golden age of fluorinated ski waxes?

And could the manufacturers themselves have contributed to their own downfall?

How to Dig Your Own Grave

First, let us clarify what we mean by the downfall of fluorinated ski waxes.

An important early step was European regulation restricting PFOA, its salts and related substances, including certain C8-based products.

This was not originally a complete ban on every fluorinated ski wax.

A broader turning point came with the prohibition of fluorinated waxes in FIS competitions from the 2023/2024 season.

A technology that once dominated racing ski preparation had gradually become part of skiing history.

But why would I suggest, in a rather provocative title, that the manufacturers might have helped dig their own grave?

If we make provocative claims, we should at least try to explain our reasoning.

So let's get started!

1. How Much Fluorine Do We Really Need?

Our first question is simple:

Does adding more fluorinated material always improve the performance of a ski wax?

In 2007, Isabelle Rogowski and her colleagues published a study investigating 19 mixtures of paraffin wax containing different concentrations of a fluorine-based additive.

The additive content ranged from 0 to 50%.

In this particular experimental system, maximum water repellency was observed at approximately 4% additive content.

Further increasing the concentration did not produce a continuous improvement in water repellency.

Of course, water repellency is not the same thing as actual skiing performance.

Glide depends on several interacting properties of the wax, ski base and snow.

The study therefore does not prove that high-fluorine waxes or fluorinated topcoats were unable to improve glide.

But it does raise an interesting question:

If more fluorinated additive does not automatically mean better water repellency, why should we assume that it automatically means better glide?

And this is where things start to get interesting.

Remember the enormous price differences between LF, HF and highly fluorinated finishing products?

The most expensive products often cost several times as much as ordinary waxes.

Was the actual performance improvement always proportional to the extra cost?

Were the recommended applications consistently supported by convincing independent tests?

Or were we occasionally being taken for a ride?

To be fair, highly fluorinated products could provide measurable improvements under certain conditions.

But that does not mean every increase in concentration or price delivered a corresponding performance gain.

And here our greedy hero enters the story.

More products and higher prices could generate greater profits.

At the same time, greater quantities of fluorinated products were manufactured, applied and eventually released into the environment.

This does not mean that every additional percentage of fluorine produced an equal increase in environmental risk.

Chemical composition matters.

But the broader question remains:

Would it not have been wiser to search for an optimal technical solution rather than continually promote more fluorinated products?

2. How Many Wax Layers Does a Ski Base Really Need?

Our second question may be even more interesting.

Remember the traditional recommendations for preparing racing skis?

First, a hydrocarbon or LF base wax.

Next, an HF wax.

And finally, the crowning glory: a highly fluorinated topcoat, powder or other finishing product.

Three steps.

Three products.

Three opportunities to sell something.

And, of course, three potential opportunities to improve glide.

But do we really understand what happens when these layers are applied one after another at the molecular level?

A Ski Base Is Not a Sponge

Modern cross-country ski bases are generally made of ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene, or UHMWPE.

The traditional image of a ski base containing a network of open pores that absorb wax like a sponge is misleading.

Wax interacts mainly with the surface and a very thin near-surface region of the polymer.

Research presented by Matthias Scherge examined the depth distribution of fluorinated components after different application methods.

In one tested powder application, fluorinated components were detected down to approximately 800 nm.

For the investigated spray, the corresponding depth was about 16 nm.

These are nanometres – millionths of a millimetre.

They are not universal penetration depths for every ski wax.

But they illustrate the extremely small scale of the surface region we are discussing.

Now let us return to our three-layer system.

First Layer: LF Wax

Imagine applying LF wax to the ski base, melting it in with an iron, allowing it to cool, then scraping and brushing away the excess material.

The wax interacts with the polymer surface and its very thin near-surface region.

The resulting surface condition depends on the wax formulation, the ski base material and the application method.

After scraping and brushing, our base preparation is complete.

And now comes the second layer.

Second Layer: HF Wax

We apply HF wax, heat the surface again and repeat the procedure.

But what actually happens to the previous layer?

Does the new wax partly mix with the old one?

Does it replace some of the existing material in the near-surface region?

Does it form a new mixture or a separate surface layer?

And what measurable improvement does this additional step bring to the ski's glide?

We cannot answer these questions merely by reading a product brochure.

We need controlled experiments and measurements under clearly defined conditions.

We certainly cannot assume that the second layer is automatically useless.

But neither should we assume that it is always essential.

And since we still have a third layer to apply, things are becoming rather entertaining.

Third Layer: The Fluorinated Crown Jewel

Now comes the most expensive part: the fluorinated topcoat.

Powder, block or another special finishing product.

Some products were melted into the surface. Others were applied cold.

But the essential questions remain the same.

How much active material actually remains on the surface after preparation?

How much is removed during brushing?

How quickly does the remaining layer wear away during contact with snow?

And how much does it improve actual glide compared with a ski prepared without it?

Experimental evidence confirms that highly fluorinated surface treatments could produce measurable performance benefits.

At the same time, wax-wear studies show that durability depends on snow conditions and material properties.

So what remains uncertain?

Whether the benefit was always worth the price, the amount of product used and the associated risks.

And that seems to me a rather important question.

Who Benefited from All Those Layers?

I am not suggesting that multi-layer waxing was nothing more than a marketing trick.

There is not enough evidence for such a sweeping conclusion.

But neither should we accept every procedure described in a manufacturer's catalogue as automatically optimal.

Manufacturers sold increasingly sophisticated, expensive and sometimes chemically problematic products.

Service technicians had to work with them.

Some of those substances were eventually released into the surrounding environment.

And manufacturers naturally earned money from sales.

The real question is whether commercial success sometimes moved too far ahead of demonstrable technical benefits.

And whether that approach could have contributed to growing distrust of fluorinated waxing technology.

The regulatory restrictions were primarily driven by health and environmental concerns about specific chemicals, not by proven commercial greed.

But that does not prevent us from asking an uncomfortable question:

Could the constant pursuit of ever more expensive products have made the problem worse?

Perhaps yes. Perhaps no.

Either way, it is worth thinking about.

What Comes Next?

In Part I, we followed the spectacular rise of fluorinated ski waxes.

In Part II, we questioned whether increasing additive concentrations, more complicated waxing procedures and higher prices always delivered corresponding benefits.

But our story is far from over.

In Part III, we turn to a much darker chapter.

Perfluorooctanoic acid.

PFOA.

C8.

And the uncomfortable question of whether some of the problems could have been addressed long before regulatory pressure made change unavoidable.

So stay tuned.

Or be afraid.

The worst may still be yet to come...

To be continued in Part III.

Scientific References

The Rise and Fall of Fluorinated Ski Waxes – Part IV: Why Avoid Fluorinated Ski Waxes?

SKIING WITH A SMILE

The Rise and Fall of Fluorinated Ski Waxes

PART IV OF IV

Why Avoid Fluorinated Ski Waxes?

There are plenty of reasons...

Perhaps the best way to sum them all up is with a line from the Czech romantic comedy From Subway with Love (Román pro ženy):

"Not those. Those are nasty!"

But enough cinematic wisdom.

Let's return to the hard facts.

In the previous three parts, we followed the rise and fall of one of the most remarkable technologies in the history of cross-country skiing.

From the revolutionary arrival of CERA F, through increasingly sophisticated and expensive fluorinated products, to questions about actual performance, human health and environmental protection.

Now it's time to bring our story to a close.

A Revolution We Cannot Deny

Let's start with something we should certainly not question.

Fluorinated ski waxes represented a major technological innovation.

Under certain snow conditions, they could deliver genuine performance advantages over conventional hydrocarbon waxes.

And anyone who prepared racing skis during the arrival of CERA F probably knows exactly what I am talking about.

So let's not rewrite history.

Fluorinated waxes worked. And sometimes they worked damn well!

But that is not the whole story.

When Performance Is No Longer the Only Measure

Over time, fluorinated waxing developed into an extensive and extremely expensive system of racing ski preparation.

LF, HF, fluorinated powders, blocks, liquids and various finishing layers.

More and more products.

Increasingly sophisticated application procedures.

And often, ever-higher prices.

In Part II, we explored whether the actual benefits of all these products always justified their cost and complexity.

There is no reason to claim that expensive fluorinated waxes never worked.

But there is equally little reason to assume that a higher additive content, more layers and a higher price always meant better glide.

And this brings us to our first important lesson.

The technical value of a product should be judged by measurable results, not by its price or marketing promises.

The Price We Do Not Pay at the Checkout

In Part III, we came to an issue that I consider even more important.

The potential consequences of fluorinated ski waxes for human health and the environment.

Scientific studies have shown that professional ski wax technicians experienced significant occupational exposure to certain PFAS substances.

Including the problematic perfluorooctanoic acid, commonly known as PFOA.

We also know that some fluorinated chemicals are extremely persistent in the environment.

Meanwhile, wax layers gradually wear away during skiing, releasing some of their material into the snow.

Which raises a fairly simple question:

Are a few seconds of faster skiing really worth those risks?

Of course, it is important to distinguish between different chemicals, their specific properties and actual exposure levels.

Not every fluorinated product presented the same level of risk.

But that distinction does not make our basic question disappear.

And What About the Most Expensive Topcoats?

Special attention should be given to the products applied as the final layer to an already prepared ski base.

The so-called topcoats or speeders.

These were often among the most expensive products in a manufacturer's entire range.

Under certain conditions, their performance benefit could be real.

But how long did that benefit last?

How much active material actually remained on the surface after application?

And how quickly did the layer wear away during contact with the snow?

The answers depend on the specific product, application method and snow conditions.

Which is precisely why we should examine not only the initial improvement in glide, but also its durability.

Because a very expensive product with a short-lived effect may be excellent business for the manufacturer.

But not necessarily an equally good deal for the skier.

Were Manufacturers Victims of Their Own Success?

And now we return to the central question of our entire series.

Could fluorinated ski wax manufacturers have contributed to the downfall of a technology that had brought them so much success?

There is no simple, definitive answer.

Restrictions on fluorinated chemicals were introduced primarily because of health and environmental concerns.

We cannot honestly claim that the bans were directly caused by the commercial greed of ski wax manufacturers.

But we can reasonably ask whether expanding product ranges, high consumption levels and the pursuit of commercial success contributed to the scale of the problems that eventually needed to be addressed.

And whether some manufacturers could have searched earlier for solutions with lower health and environmental risks.

Perhaps yes.

Perhaps no.

But questions like these are an essential part of evaluating technological progress.

So What Did Fluorinated Waxes Really Give Us?

They gave us faster skis.

New technologies.

New experiences.

And a remarkable amount of knowledge about the interaction between wax, ski base and snow.

All of that has genuine value.

But their story also taught us that technological progress cannot be measured by performance alone.

We must also consider the price we pay for that progress.

And not merely the financial price.

Today, the use of fluorinated ski waxes is prohibited in competitions governed by FIS rules.

Racing ski preparation has therefore had to move in a different direction.

And perhaps that is a good thing.

Because good skis should ultimately bring us the joy of moving through the snow.

Not unnecessary risks to people and nature.

One Final Thought: Use Your Own Brain

If I had to take just one lesson from the entire history of fluorinated ski waxes, it would be this:

Never stop thinking independently.

Do not automatically believe that a new product must be better than the previous one.

That a more expensive wax must be faster.

Or that a more complicated preparation process must necessarily produce a better result.

Ask questions.

Test.

Compare.

And remember to consider what we leave behind in the natural environment.

And if we wanted to express all these thoughts in a slightly less scientific way...

Let's return to the wonderful character from our Czech movie.

"Not those. Those are nasty!"

And that brings our story of the rise and fall of fluorinated ski waxes to an end.

The End.

Selected Scientific References

Cross-Country Skiing in the Middle of Nowhere – A Beginner's Survival Guide

For beginners who don't want to overthink things.

Would you like to try cross-country skiing, but the last thing you want is a long and complicated preparation process?

You just want to give it a try and see what happens. You have neither the time nor the desire to study theory, different types of ski wax, ski stiffness or the fundamentals of tribology before you even get started?

I understand. Completely.

So let me ask you just one question:

Are you at a ski resort, or somewhere in the middle of nowhere, far away from civilisation?

The Answer: In the Middle of Nowhere!

If you have chosen a remote corner of the mountains for your first adventure on cross-country skis, you will have to rely primarily on yourself.

Unlike those lucky beginners surrounded by civilisation, you probably won't find a ski rental shop, a service centre or a helpful waxing expert waiting around every corner.

But don't worry. I have a few simple suggestions for you as well.

For your very first attempts, I recommend classic cross-country skiing, avoiding traditional hard kick-wax application, and trying one of these options:

  • Skin skis with an integrated grip skin.
  • Adhesive kick-wax grip tape.
  • Easy-to-apply liquid kick wax.

And one more important piece of advice:

If it's snowing and the temperature is around freezing, perhaps leave your adventure for another day!

Or at least read the rest of these recommendations before making your final decision.

A Simple Rule for Getting Started

Remote mountains mean suitable skis of your own, classic technique, the simplest possible grip solution and, ideally, no fresh snowfall around freezing point.

Why?

1. Your Own Skis: Leave Grandpa's Old Skis in the Attic!

Far away from civilisation, you need skis you can actually rely on.

They don't have to be expensive or designed for racing. But they should suit your weight, abilities and the type of skiing you intend to do.

Those old cross-country skis that have been resting in the attic for twenty years may not be the best choice for your first adventure.

Leave the attic treasures where they are! You might be better off simply going for a walk.

2. Classic Skiing, or the Gentle Art of Shuffling Along

Classic cross-country skiing has one enormous advantage for beginners.

You can practise it in a wonderfully relaxed way, something I like to call the cross-country shuffle.

You move slowly through the countryside without any great sporting ambitions.

On flat terrain, you simply shuffle your feet backwards and forwards.

On gentle or steeper climbs, provided your skis have reliable grip, you can do much the same thing, just shortening your steps as necessary.

And when the hill becomes really steep?

You climb using the herringbone technique, again helped by good grip.

If the grip zone doesn't ice up or collect great lumps of sticky snow, your efforts climbing those smaller or larger hills will be rewarded.

By the delightful feeling of gliding downhill on your skis.

The result?

A lovely day outdoors, new experiences on snow, and perhaps a well-deserved stop for refreshments at a mountain hut.

3. Snowing Around Freezing? Maybe Not Today!

Slightly wet or freshly fallen damp snow, combined with temperatures around freezing, creates some of the most difficult conditions for reliable kick.

It is no coincidence that leading manufacturers offer a whole range of different kick waxes for this relatively narrow temperature range.

Finding the right wax under such unstable and constantly changing conditions can be difficult even for experienced professionals.

Which is why I would advise beginners not to tempt fate.

Unless, of course, you firmly believe in the motto:

"It doesn't matter what kind of experience it is, as long as it's unforgettable!"

Trudging along the side of the ski tracks, or even straight through them, with enormous lumps of frozen snow attached to your skis will certainly be an unforgettable experience.

Possibly so unforgettable that you'll never want to see another pair of cross-country skis again.

4. How to Avoid Traditional Kick Waxing

Fortunately, there are alternatives that can make ski preparation considerably easier for beginners.

The following options are worth considering:

  • Skin skis: a practical solution that avoids traditional kick waxing of the grip zone.
  • Adhesive grip tape: an alternative for skis with a smooth kick zone.
  • Liquid kick waxes: relatively easy-to-apply products, although snow conditions still matter.

Each of these options has advantages and limitations, but for your first attempts they may be far more welcoming than experimenting with an entire collection of traditional kick waxes.

And What About Fishscale Skis?

Here I must admit to a certain personal bias.

I've never been particularly enthusiastic about fishscale skis.

Yes, they can work, and for some recreational skiers they offer a convenient solution.

But in my opinion, they come with a few rather annoying compromises.

Grip isn't always as reliable as I would like, and on descents those scales can make a remarkable amount of noise while slowing you down.

Perhaps I'm being unfair, but in my personal ranking of alternatives to traditional kick waxing, fishscale skis don't finish very high.

Long live skin skis!

One Last Piece of Advice

If you simply want to try cross-country skiing, don't turn it into a scientific project.

Choose suitable skis, use classic technique, find a simple and reliable grip solution, and wait for reasonably friendly snow conditions.

And if you are heading into remote mountains, remember appropriate clothing, navigation, the weather forecast and a safe way home.

Then just get out there.

And if your very first trip doesn't go quite according to plan, at least you'll have a good story to tell.

After all, that's exactly why Skiing with a Smile exists.

Ski Wax, Gifts and Independent Thinking – A Story of a Mercedes and a Lada

What do ski wax, a luxurious Mercedes, a brand-new Lada and independent thinking have in common? Quite a lot, as it turns out.

A Partnership Where Everyone Wins?

Anyone involved in ski preparation knows how important cooperation with ski wax manufacturers has become.

Preparing racing skis is now so complex that the research, development and testing carried out by wax manufacturers are almost indispensable.

Their enormous investment in time, money and resources benefits not only elite athletes hoping to gain another few seconds next season, but also recreational skiers who simply want their skis to glide properly and avoid snow sticking to the grip zone.

The benefits for skiers seem obvious.

The benefits for manufacturers are equally obvious: better products, technological advantages, greater prestige, increased sales, higher profit margins and, ultimately, more money.

Invest wisely, and you can earn more!

It looks like a perfect win-win situation.

But is this seemingly harmonious relationship really as perfect as it appears?

To answer that question, we should first ask another:

Are the goals of ski wax manufacturers truly aligned with the goals of skiers?

I am afraid the answer is not quite so straightforward.

A Mercedes, a Lada and Plenty of Ski Wax

Enough general discussion. Let me tell you a story from my youth.

I grew up in a former communist country. Surprisingly, even under socialism, ski waxes and accessories from a leading Western manufacturer were available.

I was about fourteen years old at the time.

My uncle was an important official in an organisation responsible for training young competitive athletes.

I can still remember how, at every major competition, the local representative of that leading manufacturer arrived from Prague in his big Mercedes, bringing small and not-so-small gifts.

Naturally, the value of the gifts depended on one's position within the hierarchy of the socialist sports organisation.

The lower-ranking officials received the familiar BE kick wax.

The really important gentlemen, however, had to open the boot of their brand-new Ladas in a dark corner of the car park.

Their presents were simply too large to fit into their pockets.

Anyone imagining that the Western company was merely trying to help poor athletes behind the Iron Curtain would probably be mistaken.

Elite athletes were a showcase for socialist countries and received substantial support.

My uncle had a budget for ski waxes and accessories that many modern sports organisations could only dream of.

And that generous budget was probably exactly what the manufacturer's representative had in mind.

Once again, our familiar principle:

Invest wisely, and you can earn more!

Different Times, Different Scenery

Anyone who believes these practices disappeared together with socialism may be mistaken once again.

Sometimes I have the impression that only the scenery has changed.

In the old days, waxes, brushes, waxing irons, gloves, jackets, hats, ski poles and various other items were transferred from the boot of a large Mercedes into the boot of a brand-new Lada in a deserted car park.

Today, things might look considerably more sophisticated.

Perhaps a training seminar, a product presentation or a research meeting at a sunny ski resort in one of the most beautiful corners of Europe or America.

Naturally, the exhausting journey requires arriving several days early.

And after an equally exhausting two-hour presentation of the latest glide wax, a few additional days of recovery are surely necessary.

Preferably with the whole family.

After all, who would want to spend so much time away from their loved ones?

And because the new wax still needs extensive testing under various snow conditions, every participant takes home a few complimentary packages.

Times change. The scenery changes. But do the mechanisms behind it really change as much?

When Cooperation Replaces Independent Thinking

What consequences can arise when ski service technicians become too closely involved in manufacturers' research and testing programmes?

In my view, the consequences can be serious. Perhaps more serious than we might initially imagine.

Let me offer another example.

Some time ago, I read an online survey concerning the ban on fluorinated ski waxes.

Among those interviewed were leading Czech ski service technicians, including heads of national service teams and specialists working for national teams abroad.

What troubled me most was the striking similarity between their statements and the recommendations published by wax manufacturers.

Reading their responses, I had the impression that even highly experienced professionals sometimes simply repeated what manufacturers had told them.

Where was the independent verification?

Where was the critical question of whether a particular product or application was actually necessary, effective or reasonable?

That, to me, is the real problem.

Close cooperation between manufacturers and ski service technicians can undoubtedly generate valuable knowledge.

But it can also create an environment in which manufacturers' recommendations gradually become accepted as unquestionable technical truths.

Independent experiments, personal observations and critical questions may then fade into the background.

And the greatest beneficiaries may be those whose primary objective is to sell more products.

Possible consequences include excessive wax consumption, unnecessary application of certain products and additional risks to the environment and health.

I find it particularly troubling when potential health risks for ski service technicians and other people involved receive less attention than commercial interests.

Conclusion: What We May Really Lose

An excessively close relationship with ski wax manufacturers may eventually cost us something far more valuable than money:

our ability to think independently.

For a little gold, we may allow ourselves to be guided like puppets, without even noticing that we are gradually surrendering our independence.

My uncle accepted plenty of presents in those days.

But as far as I remember, there was one thing he never gave away:

his own judgement.

He still knew how to distinguish between what was right and what was wrong.

And perhaps that was the most valuable thing he possessed.

Tuesday, October 27, 2026

The Secret of a Reliable Kick – Part 1: Choosing the Right Ski Length and Stiffness

⛷️
SKIING WITH A SMILE · FOUR-PART SERIES
The Secret of a Reliable Kick
PART 1 OF 4

The Secret of a Reliable Kick – Part 1: Choosing the Right Ski Length and Stiffness

There are many things that determine whether a classic cross-country ski will provide a reliable kick.

Unfortunately, not all of them can be fixed with another layer of wax.

Some factors are beyond the control of an ordinary recreational skier. Others, such as choosing the correct kick wax, are at least theoretically within everyone's reach.

So what do we actually need for a reliable kick?

Sunday, November 9, 2025

The Secret of a Reliable Kick – Part 4: Choosing the Right Kick Wax

⛷️
SKIING WITH A SMILE · FOUR-PART SERIES
The Secret of a Reliable Kick
PART 4 OF 4

The Secret of a Reliable Kick – Part 4: Choosing the Right Kick Wax

In the previous three parts, we discussed ski stiffness and geometry, ski base properties and the correct kick zone.

Now we finally arrive at the topic most recreational skiers consider responsible for absolutely everything.

Kick wax.

When the skis do not grip, it is the wax.

When they do not glide, it is the wax.

When snow starts sticking to the skis, it is definitely the wax.

And when your skiing partner becomes unpleasant, the wax is probably responsible for that as well.

Unfortunately, selecting the correct kick wax is not always easy.

And even the best kick wax cannot correct every mistake we have made before opening the first little tin.

Wednesday, September 17, 2025

The Secret of a Reliable Kick – Part 3: Finding the Perfect Kick Zone

⛷️
SKIING WITH A SMILE · FOUR-PART SERIES
The Secret of a Reliable Kick
PART 3 OF 4

The Secret of a Reliable Kick – Part 3: Finding the Perfect Kick Zone

In Part 1, we discussed why the correct ski length, stiffness and geometry are essential for a reliable kick.

In Part 2, we looked at ski base materials and different grip systems.

Now let's assume that we have properly selected skis, a suitable ski base and even the correct kick wax.

Surely nothing can stand between us and a perfect cross-country skiing experience now.

Unfortunately, there's still one little detail.

Where exactly should we apply the kick wax?

And here we arrive at a surprisingly sensitive subject.

Size.

More precisely, the length of the kick zone.

And here, as in many other areas of life, bigger is not necessarily better.

Monday, September 15, 2025

The Secret of a Reliable Kick – Part 2: Why the Right Ski Base Matters

⛷️
SKIING WITH A SMILE · FOUR-PART SERIES
The Secret of a Reliable Kick
PART 2 OF 4

The Secret of a Reliable Kick – Part 2: Why the Right Ski Base Matters

In Part 1, we discovered why the correct ski length, stiffness and geometry are essential for a reliable kick.

But even perfectly selected skis do not automatically guarantee reliable grip and good glide.

The ski base matters, too.

And, perhaps even more importantly, we need to understand what we actually intend to do with our skis.

After all, someone who enjoys wandering through a snowy forest needs something rather different from a recreational skier on perfectly groomed tracks.

And both probably need something completely different from the ambitious athlete who monitors speed, heart rate and personal records on every outing.

All three can be perfectly happy.

Just probably not on the same pair of skis.