# When have you hit "Tuna Speed"?



## Boston Bulldog (Feb 5, 2014)

I had my skis rattling pretty good as I flew down Lynx @ Sunapee last weekend and while it wasn't  "76 mph" :lol:,I think I may have brushed into Tuna Speed territory for a second!

When have you reached the infamous Tuna Speed(TM)?


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 5, 2014)

Every moment I am skiing is TunaSpeed(TM). That is the definition of TunaSpeed(TM). Others can only aspire.

Sunapee is a good place to go fast if it's not crowded.. a few long trails with little or no major turns or intersections.


----------



## Puck it (Feb 5, 2014)

bdfreetuna said:


> Every moment I am skiing is TunaSpeed(TM). That is the definition of TunaSpeed(TM). Others can only aspire.
> 
> Sunapee is a good place to go fast if it's not crowded.. a few long trails with little or no major turns or intersections.



Tunaspeed is letting is rip on Avalanche or Paulie's Folly with no check!!!!


----------



## from_the_NEK (Feb 5, 2014)

Ditto Warren's Way, Upper/Lower Dipper, Upper Lower Willoughby. I have reached TunaSpeed(TM) on each of those trails.


----------



## hammer (Feb 5, 2014)




----------



## Nick (Feb 5, 2014)




----------



## from_the_NEK (Feb 5, 2014)




----------



## Domeskier (Feb 5, 2014)

Nick said:


> View attachment 10868



  This is awesome!


----------



## Cornhead (Feb 5, 2014)

bdfreetuna, will you be attending the AZ Summit? I would like to witness tunaspeed in person. First tracks would be a good time to let em rip, scare some 1% ers.

Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Cannonball (Feb 5, 2014)

I hit TunaSpeed on Sunday!!!



Well, to tell the truth, I forgot to turn the Navionics app off until I was halfway home.....


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 5, 2014)

Cornhead said:


> bdfreetuna, will you be attending the AZ Summit? I would like to witness tunaspeed in person. First tracks would be a good time to let em rip, scare some 1% ers.
> 
> Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2



Sorry too broke to attend the Summit! TunaSpeed(TM) is difficult to witness, unless the witness were to ski down most of the mountain to the location where the skier is most likely to reach terminal velocity.


----------



## hammer (Feb 5, 2014)

Boston Bulldog said:


> I had my skis rattling pretty good as I flew down Lynx @ Sunapee last weekend and while it wasn't  "76 mph" :lol:,I think I may have brushed into Tuna Speed territory for a second!
> 
> When have you reached the infamous Tuna Speed?
> 
> View attachment 10853


What app is this and is it available on Android?


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 5, 2014)

SkiTracker Free and yes andriod


----------



## gmcunni (Feb 5, 2014)




----------



## Boston Bulldog (Feb 5, 2014)

hammer said:


> What app is this and is it available on Android?



Ski Tracks. I have the premium version on the iPhone and it only costs $.99. It probably is on Android and you should totally get it, well worth the money. It has a GPS map that shows where you were on the mountain and has stats on each run. For example, I was able to see exactly where on the trail I hit my top speed etc...

Not always accurate, but it's a fun little tool.


----------



## Boston Bulldog (Feb 5, 2014)




----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 5, 2014)

bdfreetuna said:


> SkiTracker Free and yes andriod




Is that better than most?

I've tried about 3 of these ski tracking GPS apps, and truth be told, they've all stunk.


----------



## skiNEwhere (Feb 5, 2014)

This one time I decided to just point my ski's downhill and see what would happen. I hit 156+ mph. Does that count as Tuna speed times 2? (TSx2)


----------



## Brad J (Feb 7, 2014)

bdfreetuna said:


> Sorry too broke to attend the Summit! TunaSpeed(TM) is difficult to witness, unless the witness were to ski down most of the mountain to the location where the skier is most likely to reach terminal velocity.



Can we start a fund so he can attend the Summit, I sure would love to witness "TUNA SPEED"


----------



## Nick (Feb 7, 2014)

Summit 2012 I hit 56 mph ... I thought that was cooking

Sent from my SCH-I545 using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## jrmagic (Feb 7, 2014)

Everyone at the summit should do a Chinese tuna speed downhill. ThAt would be quite the site lol


----------



## snowmonster (Feb 8, 2014)

Once in 1987, I hit 88 mph and woke up in 2014. Was that tuna speed?


Sent from my iPad using AlpineZone mobile app


----------



## Madroch (Feb 8, 2014)

Thread delivers.....


----------



## Wavewheeler (Feb 10, 2014)

I was riding the lift at Hunter with these 2 guys and one of them was checking his phone and saying "Last run was 66.7 mph, I think that earned an Instagram".


----------



## Nick (Feb 10, 2014)

Bode Miller _almost _hit Tunaspeed in the DH.


----------



## LiquidFeet (Feb 10, 2014)

Note: the maximum speeds of Sailfish, Striped Marlin, Swordfish and Wahoo all exceed those of the tuna.

http://www.speedofanimals.com/animals/bluefin_tuna


----------



## Nick (Feb 10, 2014)

WahooSpeed (TM)


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 10, 2014)

LiquidFeet said:


> Note: the maximum speeds of Sailfish, Striped Marlin, Swordfish and Wahoo all exceed those of the tuna.
> 
> http://www.speedofanimals.com/animals/bluefin_tuna



What the heck do they mean by "feels like" speed? I can imagine it might feel like a Marlin is going much faster if you get speared by it.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 10, 2014)

Nick said:


> Bode Miller _almost _hit Tunaspeed in the DH.



Yeah well I heard the snow was kind of soft in Sochi. Warm weather patterns.

If Bode was skiing at Berkshire East or Mt Sunapee he probably could have hit TunaSpeed(TM).


----------



## LiquidFeet (Feb 10, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> What the heck do they mean by "feels like" speed? I can imagine it might feel like a Marlin is going much faster if you get speared by it.



I kept fishing around on that site until I found the explanation.  If the specified creature were to have your height and weight (which you can enter at the top of the page), and if it were traveling at its  documented maximum speed, it would "feel like" the quoted speed.  They are trying to tell you what it would feel like for you if you travelled at that speed, but it's so convoluted that it ends up not making any sense.


----------



## jrmagic (Feb 11, 2014)

LiquidFeet said:


> I kept fishing around on that site until I found the explanation.  If the specified creature were to have your height and weight (which you can enter at the top of the page), and if it were traveling at its  documented maximum speed, it would "feel like" the quoted speed.  They are trying to tell you what it would feel like for you if you travelled at that speed, but it's so convoluted that it ends up not making any sense.



 I always felt that dog years or cat years were nonsensical but compared to this they are pretty concrete.


----------



## Twism86 (Feb 11, 2014)

On a particularly icy day last year at Mt Snow the Mt Snow app said I hit 52 MPH. I dont believe it because my shorts were still clean....


----------



## VTKilarney (Feb 11, 2014)

I thought that I had hit Tuna Speed after my last day out until I realized that I left my ski run app in track mode during the drive home.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Feb 11, 2014)

Saturday at Burke I hit "helmet sucking vortex" fast on Lower Willoughby. I wonder how fast that is?  (I figure it was somewhere just below 60mph).


----------



## Tin (Feb 11, 2014)




----------



## Twism86 (Feb 11, 2014)

Seeing as I just joined the forum today, I have no clue whats going on...... Like that guy who unexpectedly walks into the orgy and doesnt know if he should just go along with it or back away slowly....


----------



## mountainjam (Feb 11, 2014)

Hit this high speed going straight-out down the right side of Lynx at Sunapee midweek:


----------



## from_the_NEK (Feb 11, 2014)

Twism86 - to get educated, read this thread. http://forums.alpinezone.com/showth...ingish-and-now-I-can-prove-my-speed?highlight=


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 11, 2014)

mountainjam said:


> Hit this high speed going straight-out down the right side of Lynx at Sunapee midweek:
> 
> View attachment 11066



Most people are posting some low-ass speeds up in here trying to claim tunaspeed.

But this looks legit. Also Sunapee is a known mountain where high speed is easy to achieve.

Nicely done. Since my previous 74mph speed was deemed impossible by the majority of the forum-- and I'd rather not stake my reputation on the accuracy of a smartphone app -- I think you might have just posted the new speed to beat.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 11, 2014)

bdfreetuna said:


> Most people are posting some low-ass speeds up in here trying to claim tunaspeed.
> 
> But this looks legit. Also Sunapee is a known mountain where high speed is easy to achieve.
> 
> Nicely done. Since my previous 74mph speed was deemed impossible by the majority of the forum-- and I'd rather not stake my reputation on the accuracy of a smartphone app -- I think you might have just posted the new speed to beat.



 55 degree slope at Sunapee....yup dead on!


----------



## Dickc (Feb 11, 2014)

Does this count as "tuna Speed"

Tracked by Ski Tracks at Killington.  This was the screen shot at lunch.



It corrected to 68.6 later.  I could not find any run data faster than about 45 MPH in the time that peak occurred.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 11, 2014)

seems legit


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 11, 2014)

It seems really hard for me to believe someone could reach similar speeds as racers on a DH course when none of the mountains in the east with the exception of Whiteface could ever host an Olympic DH event.


----------



## Tin (Feb 11, 2014)

Where did you hit 35* at K?


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 11, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> It seems really hard for me to believe someone could reach similar speeds as racers on a DH course when none of the mountains in the east with the exception of Whiteface could ever host an Olympic DH event.



Yeah, not happening. 

Maybe the MPH/KMH thing got screwed up and it was actually ~50mph.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 11, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> It seems really hard for me to believe someone could reach similar speeds as racers on a DH course when none of the mountains in the east with the exception of Whiteface could ever host an Olympic DH event.



Yeah I don't believe it myself.

Actually IMO anything over 60 qualifies as tunaspeed because it's hard for people to go much faster than that with mainstream ski gear. I doubt I've passed 65 this season and its certainly not a race in my mind it's too dangerous to try to max out on speed.

But occasionally on a good day with fast snow, clear slopes, good visibility and all the factors in place most good skiers should be able to touch 60 and I would tend to believe anything up to around 65mph, only more if the skier had serious creds.


----------



## Dickc (Feb 11, 2014)

It has to be a GPS glitch.  None of the individual run data is faster than about 45 MPH.  I know even that data overstates by 5-10 MPH.  If I had hit that 79.3 there would have been a VERY long brown stain on a trail.


----------



## Nick (Feb 11, 2014)

This might be my favorite thread ever.


----------



## Dickc (Feb 11, 2014)

Tin said:


> Where did you hit 35* at K?



Outer Limits, Superstar Upper and Lower, Cascade to name a few.  All are good 35* pitches.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 11, 2014)

Dickc said:


> It has to be a GPS glitch.  None of the individual run data is faster than about 45 MPH.  I know even that data overstates by 5-10 MPH.  If I had hit that 79.3 there would have been a VERY long brown stain on a trail.



I think someone took a snowmobile ride up the hill!


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 11, 2014)

bdfreetuna said:


> Yeah I don't believe it myself.
> 
> Actually IMO anything over 60 qualifies as tunaspeed because it's hard for people to go much faster than that with mainstream ski gear. I doubt I've passed 65 this season and its certainly not a race in my mind it's too dangerous to try to max out on speed.
> 
> But occasionally on a good day with fast snow, clear slopes, good visibility and all the factors in place most good skiers should be able to touch 60 and I would tend to believe anything up to around 65mph, only more if the skier had serious creds.



I guess 60 could be possible but it would have to be on a mountain trail that has consistent steep vertical over a long distance like a Skyward at Whiteface.


----------



## makado420 (Feb 11, 2014)

Does this count as tuna speed


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 11, 2014)

makado420 said:


> View attachment 11071
> Does this count as tuna speed
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone



Where was that?


----------



## dlague (Feb 11, 2014)

I ski fast much of the time but do not track my speed however trying to hit tuna speed is not a goal!


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## deadheadskier (Feb 11, 2014)

I don't have the gear to safely hit Tuna Speed.  I'd want to be on a set of race stock GS skis 185cm in length.  I certainly don't ski much over I'd assume 40 mph on my 175cm Fischer Motives.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Feb 11, 2014)

dlague said:


> *trying to hit tuna speed is not a goal!*



I usually stop at mahi-mahi speed.


----------



## makado420 (Feb 11, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> Where was that?



It's was actually at belleayre mountain 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 11, 2014)

makado420 said:


> It's was actually at belleayre mountain
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone



Doesn't seem likely. Not enough sustained vertical to hit that speed.


----------



## makado420 (Feb 11, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> Doesn't seem likely. Not enough sustained vertical to hit that speed.



I know but I guess when u go from top to bottom with out turning I guess it is possible 




Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 11, 2014)

seems legit. Never been to Belleayre but it looks like a good steepish mountain to straight line. What's that place got for a vert like 1400?


----------



## makado420 (Feb 11, 2014)

bdfreetuna said:


> seems legit. Never been to Belleayre but it looks like a good steepish mountain to straight line. What's that place got for a vert like 1400?



1300 almost 1400 lol it's a smaller mtn but no body rides there so I usually have the place to my self it seems alows for some fast days 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Boston Bulldog (Feb 11, 2014)

Now remember; When fishing for to reach tuna speed, watch out for Dolphins


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 11, 2014)

bdfreetuna said:


> Yeah I don't believe it myself.
> 
> Actually IMO anything over 60 qualifies as tunaspeed because it's hard for people to go much faster than that with mainstream ski gear. I doubt I've passed 65 this season and its certainly not a race in my mind it's too dangerous to try to max out on speed.
> 
> But occasionally on a good day with fast snow, clear slopes, good visibility and all the factors in place most good skiers should be able to touch 60 and I would tend to believe anything up to around 65mph, only more if the skier had serious creds.



I have spoken with a few witnesses to Tuna Speed and most of them agree you did not look like you were in control.


----------



## mountainjam (Feb 11, 2014)

Here is what the company that sells "Ski Tracks" says about accuracy:

_"Track statistics such as Max Speed, Slope Angle are calculated on good quality location data over approximately 100 meters (300  feet). Our tests have shown that the accuracy is about ±5% depending on location.  With regard to Ski Distance, Ski Vertical these are accurate to around ±5% again depending on location."_

I've tested the ski tracks app in my car while driving and it appeared to register my car's actual top speed.  I can also say that while I can't confirm 100% that my ski tracks speed was completely accurate, I can confirm that my highest speed run definitely felt like the fastest I'd ever gone while tracking myself.  When I tracked the 63mph run I had intentionally been working at going faster and increasing the max speed on the app, and with each run that felt faster the speed went up on the app from 50mph my first run, to 56, then 58, then 63.  On the 63mph run I was pretty much straight-out and not completely in control, more like riding it out until the runout at the bottom.  So it may not have been 63, but it was faster then my earlier runs, and it was faster then my buddy who I smoked and who only got up to 52mph on his track.  It's all relative.  If nothing more it has pushed me to ski faster, no matter what the actual speed is.  

I have 179 K2 Fujas, and I weigh 230lbs (I lift), so I had a lot of momentum and good sized skis.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 12, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> I have spoken with a few witnesses to Tuna Speed and most of them agree you did not look like you were in control.



say what?


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Feb 12, 2014)

I don't know how to do a screen capture from my phone, but here is a screen capture of the AlpineReplay stats. That was last winter on full FIS ace stock straight lining. Go ahead and tell me how its fake.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 13, 2014)

Hawkshot99 said:


> I don't know how to do a screen capture from my phone, but here is a screen capture of the AlpineReplay stats. That was last winter on full FIS ace stock straight lining. Go ahead and tell me how its fake.



The fact that you were going 85 and it's only 136th says it all.


----------



## Puck it (Feb 13, 2014)

I call BS on all of these top speeds.  No way.


----------



## Tin (Feb 13, 2014)

Puck it said:


> I call BS on all of these top speeds.  No way.



You've never gone straight down the Tramline without turning? What a puss!


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 13, 2014)

Tin said:


> You've never gone straight down the Tramline without turning? What a puss!



I'm sure a few people have....unintentionally


----------



## Puck it (Feb 13, 2014)

Tin said:


> You've never gone straight down the Tramline without turning? What a puss!



On a deep powder that is almost possible.  I have straight lined Avalanche from the cat track and there is no way I have hit more than 60 if that.


----------



## Tin (Feb 13, 2014)

We need to purchase an official AZ Radar Gun. We could all meet up at Wachusett and the person who gets their ticket taken first shall be given the Tuna Cup.


----------



## makado420 (Feb 13, 2014)

Tin said:


> We need to purchase an official AZ Radar Gun. We could all meet up at Wachusett and the person who gets their ticket taken first shall be given the Tuna Cup.



That sounds like a sick Idea except they wouldn't be able to catch use to take are tickets if we are going tuna speed


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Feb 13, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> The fact that you were going 85 and it's only 136th says it all.



I dont take the top speed to seriiusly as its only a tiny blip of data. The "sustained speed" however is quite accurate. It is a series of readings over a 10 second span. It is the slowest you went in that time span.

Sent from my SGH-S959G using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Feb 13, 2014)

Puck it said:


> I call BS on all of these top speeds.  No way.



For someone who mostly skis trees natural terrain or caually skis along speeds seem crazy high. But take out a very stiff race ski and go full tuck no turns down a entire mtn and they are not BS by any means.
I have nothing to prove to any of you, so I dont really caee if its BS to you.

Sent from my SGH-S959G using Tapatalk 2


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 13, 2014)

Hawkshot99 said:


> For someone who mostly skis trees natural terrain or caually skis along speeds seem crazy high. But take out a very stiff race ski and go full tuck no turns down a entire mtn and they are not BS by any means.
> I have nothing to prove to any of you, so I dont really caee if its BS to you.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-S959G using Tapatalk 2



Then why post it?


----------



## Domeskier (Feb 13, 2014)

Hawkshot99 said:


> For someone who mostly skis trees natural terrain or caually skis along speeds seem crazy high. But take out a very stiff race ski and go full tuck no turns down a entire mtn and they are not BS by any means.
> I have nothing to prove to any of you, so I dont really caee if its BS to you.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-S959G using Tapatalk 2



I agree.  Most of the Tunaspeed skeptics like to point to average speeds of world class downhill racers, apparently forgetting that downhill courses are intentionally designed to make achieving Tunaspeed difficult.  I have no interest in achieving tunaspeed and, even if I wanted to, I do not have a smart phone with GPS to verify it, but I think a decent amatuer on the right terrain can max at the speeds Tuna and other are reporting.


----------



## Nick (Feb 13, 2014)

60 is reasonable on a decent long pitch. I've hit that (according to my app again) but that sounds like a reasonable "high" value.


----------



## Nick (Feb 13, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> Then why post it?



I'm assuming to make the point that it is possible.


----------



## Puck it (Feb 13, 2014)

Hawkshot99 said:


> For someone who mostly skis trees natural terrain or caually skis along speeds seem crazy high. But take out a very stiff race ski and go full tuck no turns down a entire mtn and they are not BS by any means.
> I have nothing to prove to any of you, so I dont really caee if its BS to you.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-S959G using Tapatalk 2


----------



## moguler6 (Feb 13, 2014)

Hawkshot99 said:


> I don't know how to do a screen capture from my phone, but here is a screen capture of the AlpineReplay stats. That was last winter on full FIS ace stock straight lining. Go ahead and tell me how its fake.



Fake!

If you can do this, join the US Ski Team.


----------



## bdfreetuna (Feb 13, 2014)

moguler6 said:


> Fake!
> 
> If you can do this, join the US Ski Team.



Some of us have better things to do than represent our country in the highest levels of athleticism.


----------



## Nick (Feb 13, 2014)

^lol


----------



## makado420 (Feb 13, 2014)

bdfreetuna said:


> Some of us have better things to do than represent our country in the highest levels of athleticism.



Better thing to do what would be better than that 


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## vermonter44 (Feb 13, 2014)

I've never reached Tunaspeed. I think the fastest I've gone was about 45 at Sugarloaf in December this year. Personally, I don;t feel the need to go faster.


----------



## Tin (Feb 13, 2014)

makado420 said:


> Better thing to do what would be better than that
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone



Bode Miller-it and get beers and broads from as many countries as possible.


----------



## Hawkshot99 (Feb 13, 2014)

moguler6 said:


> Fake!
> 
> If you can do this, join the US Ski Team.



The difference between hitting crazy top speeds while ina race coarse navigating gates, and straight lining a steep run are far greater than you think.

Sent from my SGH-S959G using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Domeskier (Feb 14, 2014)

Hawkshot99 said:


> The difference between hitting crazy top speeds while ina race coarse navigating gates, and straight lining a steep run are far greater than you think.



Exactly.  If downhill courses were set up to maximize speed, the racers would be hitting 140mph+ like in the video skiNEwhere posted.  That's the proper comparison and the fact that people are reporting top speeds of about half that puts it well within the bounds of possibility.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 14, 2014)

Domeskier said:


> Exactly.  If downhill courses were set up to maximize speed, the racers would be hitting 140mph+ like in the video skiNEwhere posted.  That's the proper comparison and the fact that people are reporting top speeds of about half that puts it well within the bounds of possibility.



But at the same time the pitch and sustained vertical is much longer than any mountain anyone has mentioned here. Hitting the speeds that people have claimed on the mountains mentioned are very unlikely.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 14, 2014)

And not to be a douche but if you really are going 60-80 mph on an open trail you are putting everyone else at risk. There is no way you can avoid another skier if they were to turn in front of you. If you want to turn your brain into scrambled eggs go for it but putting everyone else at risk is reckless


----------



## Domeskier (Feb 14, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> But at the same time the pitch and sustained vertical is much longer than any mountain anyone has mentioned here. Hitting the speeds that people have claimed on the mountains mentioned are very unlikely.



Point taken.  However, the fact that skiers were hitting 70+ within seconds out of the start on the Sochi downhill course seems to suggest that you really don't need a particularly long sustain pitch to achieve Tunaspeed.  I guess I'm inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt until someone explains why the programs they are using are inaccurate in so many cases.  Of course, I'm pretty sure I've never actually seen someone skiing at Tunaspeed or even close to it at any resort I've skied.  Then again, maybe I don't get out enough.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Feb 14, 2014)

The radar gunned speed I've used as an example in the past was on the lower part of Lower Warren's Way at Burke (CCC road to the bottom of the Poma). I hit 63mph over the 250-300 vert of the run (700 ft length). On a steeper slope with a longer run (e.g. Upper Warrens Way) I could certainly see 70 being achievable before wind drag takes over. However, skiing over 60 is not really a good idea unless you are on a closed course.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 14, 2014)

from_the_NEK said:


> The radar gunned speed I've used as an example in the past was on the lower part of Lower Warren's Way at Burke (CCC road to the bottom of the Poma). I hit 63mph over the 250-300 vert of the run (700 ft length). On a steeper slope with a longer run (e.g. Upper Warrens Way) I could certainly see 70 being achievable before wind drag takes over. However, skiing over 60 is not really a good idea unless you are on a closed course.



Interesting. That's is not a lot of area. Someone had a gun? I'll just steal a LIDAR from the inventory closet. That would give a very precise reading. I'm sure no one would mind!


----------



## from_the_NEK (Feb 14, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> Interesting. That's is not a lot of area. Someone had a gun? I'll just steal a LIDAR from the inventory closet. That would give a very precise reading. I'm sure no one would mind!



It was a closed "Speed Trap" area that the mountain had set up for fun on a Spring morning 4 or 5 years ago.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Feb 14, 2014)

from_the_NEK said:


> It was a closed "Speed Trap" area that the mountain had set up for fun on a Spring morning 4 or 5 years ago.



I would believe that over an app any day. Did you take additional runs to test the accuracy?


----------



## from_the_NEK (Feb 14, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> I would believe that over an app any day. Did you take additional runs to test the accuracy?



I took two runs. The first I hit 57 mph but I had my coat on and I could feel my hood billowing up like a sail creating a lot of drag. I ditched the coat and hit the 63 mph mark. I could still feel a lot of drag on my ski pants and my helmet was getting sucked off my head. The only person faster than me that day was a racer kid in a speed suit and on GS skis. He hit 65 mph.


----------



## Boston Bulldog (Oct 14, 2014)

C'mon... show yourself Tuna! We need some early season Killington speed reports:grin:


----------



## Domeskier (Oct 14, 2014)

Boston Bulldog said:


> C'mon... show yourself Tuna! We need some early season Killington speed reports:grin:



First sign that winter is here: a Tuna trip report!!


----------



## skiNEwhere (Oct 14, 2014)

Trying to beat my personal best of 156 mph


----------



## Puck it (Oct 14, 2014)

skiNEwhere said:


> Trying to beat my personal best of 156 mph


I am calling you out now.


----------



## steamboat1 (Oct 14, 2014)

Does a bear shit in the woods?


----------



## MadMadWorld (Oct 14, 2014)

steamboat1 said:


> Does a bear shit in the woods?



No


----------



## CoolMike (Oct 15, 2014)

Terminal velocity of a human in free fall is about 120 MPH.  Presumably with tucking and a speed suit you can hit 125-130 MPH.

Without a good strong tailwind or some sort of rocket propulsion system 156 seems unlikely.  :flag:

My best speeds are around 40 MPH and it feels fast to me.  When you hit a small crest in the hill you are air born for a reasonable amount of time.  This is on a snowboard however, which I am think is slower than a good fast skier with long skis.  i have not yet gone fast just for the sake of breaking a personal record.  Perhaps someday the conditions will be just right and I'll go for it.  I have fallen at ~40mph and its not very fun because of how much ground you cover before you can stop yourself safely.


----------



## skiNEwhere (Oct 15, 2014)

CoolMike said:


> Terminal velocity of a human in free fall is about 120 MPH.  Presumably with tucking and a speed suit you can hit 125-130 MPH.
> 
> Without a good strong tailwind or some sort of rocket propulsion system 156 seems unlikely.  :flag:
> 
> My best speeds are around 40 MPH and it feels fast to me.  When you hit a small crest in the hill you are air born for a reasonable amount of time.  This is on a snowboard however, which I am think is slower than a good fast skier with long skis.  i have not yet gone fast just for the sake of breaking a personal record.  Perhaps someday the conditions will be just right and I'll go for it.  I have fallen at ~40mph and its not very fun because of how much ground you cover before you can stop yourself safely.



It's been done. There are other videos around if you look for it.

https://eurosport.yahoo.com/video/italian-origone-breaks-speed-skiing-060945126.html


----------



## Domeskier (Oct 15, 2014)

CoolMike said:


> Without a good strong tailwind or some sort of rocket propulsion system 156 seems unlikely.



156mph is just a speck in the rear view mirror of Tuna Speed.


----------



## Highway Star (Oct 17, 2014)

Dickc said:


> It has to be a GPS glitch.  None of the individual run data is faster than about 45 MPH.  I know even that data overstates by 5-10 MPH.  If I had hit that 79.3 there would have been a VERY long brown stain on a trail.



Ski Tracks LIES to you about your speed.


----------



## Dickc (Oct 17, 2014)

Highway Star said:


> Ski Tracks LIES to you about your speed.



Maybe we should have a "Ski Tracks" thread solely for the purpose of posting the most outrageous screen shots from the app?


----------



## tree_skier (Oct 17, 2014)

I had a good laugh last year when one of my ski team kids swore he hit 40 mph running across the parking lot because his phone app said that was his speed


----------



## Cannonball (Oct 17, 2014)

According to Ski Tracks I can throw my phone at 47MPH. No future for me in MLB. And now I need a new phone....


----------



## Ragman (Oct 19, 2014)

It is so cool that phones have these apps now that can tell you your speed.  Back in my day of skiing you could only guess how fast you were going.  I felt like I reached speeds of 50mph but it was probably more like 25.  lol.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Oct 20, 2014)

Ragman said:


> *It is so cool that phones have these apps now that can tell you your speed*.



Can they though?  I see such ridiculous stuff posted here from each and every one of them I could never trust it.

  If it tells you you're skiing 65mph and you're obviously not, how do you trust it when it tells you you're skiing at 15mph (even if that might seem reasonable)?  Maybe it's my background, but if an instrument for calculation can be proven wrong even once, it's enough for me to not use it.


----------



## Edd (Oct 20, 2014)

BenedictGomez said:


> Can they though?  I see such ridiculous stuff posted here from each and every one of them I could never trust it.
> 
> If it tells you you're skiing 65mph and you're obviously not, how do you trust it when it tells you you're skiing at 15mph (even if that might seem reasonable)?  Maybe it's my background, but if an instrument for calculation can be proven wrong even once, it's enough for me to not use it.



Essentially correct.  You can't trust any of this stuff.


----------



## BeefyBoy50 (Oct 20, 2014)

Highway Star said:


> Ski Tracks LIES to you about your speed.



I've seen numerous false results from ski tracks, mainly in situations where I ski with a friend side-by-side down a run and then his speed will be 15 miles an hour less than mine. It's just not accurate. I use it only for the map view which is cool. Alpine Replay, or I guess Trace Snow as it is now called, is more accurate for speeds and data like that. I would expect it to be because it has leaderboards so they want to prevent as many glitches as possible.


----------



## Puck it (Oct 20, 2014)

I am pretty consistent.


----------



## Highway Star (Oct 20, 2014)

Puck it said:


> I am pretty consistent.




So you max out at a true 35 mph on the average run?  Sounds about right.


----------



## Puck it (Oct 20, 2014)

Highway Star said:


> So you max out at a true 35 mph on the average run?  Sounds about right.




It was a total tongue in cheek.  I don't think I hit anything near 60.


----------



## Cannonball (Oct 30, 2014)

Navionics has a promo running for free download from now till Nov 2nd (app usually runs ~$10). Being primarily a marine navigation company they might be the best suited to measure TUNA speed!!  https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/navionics-ski/id739067626?mt=8


----------



## MadMadWorld (Oct 30, 2014)

Highway Star said:


> So you max out at a true 35 mph on the average run?  Sounds about right.



He's slow as hell


----------



## Not Sure (Oct 30, 2014)

Cannonball said:


> Navionics has a promo running for free download from now till Nov 2nd (app usually runs ~$10). Being primarily a marine navigation company they might be the best suited to measure TUNA speed!!  https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/navionics-ski/id739067626?mt=8



Don't all these ski App's run off cell tower? 
Would a plug in recevier be more accurate?
http://www.amazon.com/Bad-Elf-1000-...&sr=8-1&keywords=bad+elf+gps+receiver+i+phone


----------

