Z7ST

[Gloersen]

 

 

Hope the fall wasn't bad. Have broken 3, 1 attributable to > 1

season at pylon, the other 2 where the end imbricates back into the braid in

the shorter segments, both < 6 months, both the same "reputable"

brand. Don't use that brand anymore for practice. I find the "In Tow"

ropes quite good. After reading your post though, due for another.

 

40/50 adjusts here Sat/Sun, & a bit of trepidation 1 week post

head wound; not ideal tuning conditions.

 

The ski is fast though.

 

Next move will be a try with bindings back up to 30/17.675 to see

if speed can be bled a bit into offside without having to jump on the front which

I was finding with -32’s, particularly in tailwind.

 

 

[Roger]

Gloersen, the fall was no issue as I was just hooking up and didn't have a lot of speed yet. The ski seems to work better as the line gets shorter. At 28 and 32, a little help initiating the turn maybe, but at 35, it was just turning by itself. I would recommend the stock setting (for a 67") of 30" for the front binding until you are sure there is need to move them. The ski is incredibly fast and amazingly handles the extra speed at the turns (if you can). I just sent a check, so this will be my stick going forward...

 

[JH]

Have any go from RCX to Z7 st is it better and do you choose a shorter ski on Z7 then you have on RCX

[Old MS Accout]

Going out now. A bit windy but her 65 is set up at 2.497, 6.874, .730 from the tail.

I was able to get her rear toe plate closer to the front boot which should help her tail riding the ski. So far she is liking the ski but says it is not as fast as her 9700 but she loves the turns. I just need to talk her into selling the 9700 but she has all the autographs on it. T Mo, CP, Brenda Baldwin, Carly, stisher, Bri wagner.    

[RichardDoane]

MS - bring that ski to Seattle and we'll sign it too...

[Old MS Accout]

It will never sell with you guys on there.

She rode it for 2 sets at those numbers and loved it. It looks like I will no longer be filling holes, fixing inserts and dealing with the 9700. I think I am happier then she is about the Z.

Things are looking good. Chick dig D3.  

[Gloersen]

still liking 6.870, tried a few thousandths longer, not as good for now.

adding depth to 2.503

just need to learn to ski instead of backsiding the 2nd wake

[Roger]

Made the last setting changes I will probably make for a while now. I wanted the on-side to feel as natural as the off-side so I went back with the fin to make the tip come down. I'm now running: 6.905, 2.505, .710 (slot caliper). A keen eye in the boat tells me the ski is working great, just the skier needs to improve certain form issues. Even with my form defects, I managed to run 3 28s, and 2 32s (my first 32s behind ZO this year). When I do manage to get my form correct, the ski seems to turn by itself which is what I've dreamed of...

 

[Roger]

New numbers this weekend based on my friends experiments. He is now on the carbon fin (106) and running consistant 38's with 4 @ 39 his best so far. My numbers using the stock fin are pretty close to his at: 2.449 - 7.007 - .587 using the large Goode wing upside-down at 9 degrees. These numbers are a long way from the D3 stock numbers, but I ran my first 35 Saturday near these numbers and the ski feels even better at these numbers. Next for me is to grind my Carbon 106 a bit (needs small amount of grinding to clear one of the clamping screws) and put that fin in instead. Off to Chet next Saturday to get help for me , now that the ski is working the way I want it to.

 

[jdarwin]

Roger - I noticed that the stock numbers for the ST were deeper than the "original" Z7 which leads me to believe the ski rides higher in the preturn/turn.  Your numbers are WAY shallow and long.  Interesting.  I tried a 106 carbon fin (on my Z7) and found the off-side worked very well but the on-side was too aggressive.  Also, I found it difficult to move the ski out off the second wake and create space before the buoy at 35 off.  I can't imagine going shallower would solve those issues but the additional length may play a role.  I may give it another shot.

BTW, saw someone ski the ST for the first time this weekend - there may be something to that ski afterall.

[Old MS Accout]

I bet Team M has a garage full of them by next week. 66-67-68 and maybe a 65 for the Mrs.   

[Roger]

Well, I know the numbers are way far from the D3 recommendations, but I couldn't seem to get an aggresive enough on-side. The off-side turns great no matter what numbers I put in (that's a good thing). The new numbers are closer to Goode numbers except a bit further back and a bit longer. I have to say, I've never had my fin this long on a Goode or the Fischer and in fact ran it a little shorter than the stock Goode/Fischer settings. With a length over 7 inches on the Goode, I'd be folding like a cheap lawn chair...

This ski tolerates a number of fin positions IMO. Also, the large Goode wing is what really brought the on-side in for me. With the stock D3 wing (about the same size as the standard Goode wing), it was still not quite aggressive enough on the on-side for me. I just removed my Carbon 106 from the Fischer and I'll probably do the needed grinding on Wednesday and be able to try it out Thursday. I'll ski tonight with what I have right now.

[Gloersen]

 

 

Tried these #’s for

grins.

 

 

 

 

class=apple-style-span>2.449 - 7.004 - .587 wing upside-down at 9 degrees, close to what

you posted, a radical change from .74 – 6.871 – 2.5.

 

 

 

Ran a couple 28’s surprisingly,

though the offside was too much & onside required too much effort.

 

 

 

Changed to 2.456 – 6.990 -

.587, ran some decent 28’s but to much deceleration into offside to shorten

line.

 

 

 

Reminiscent of the slot

fin feel this far back & long.

 

 

 

Concur the ski works well

at a wide range of fin settings & the offside seems to always be there

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[jdarwin]

Spent 3 days getting the ST dialed in this weekend.  After trying several fin/binding combinations with limited success, I decided to try the fin numbers from my "old" Z7.  With the bindings at "stock" hole position (middle), the ski performed much better but the tip wouldn't engage quite soon enough in the preturn and I was getting some tip rise on my off-side.  Moved the bindings one hole forward (I'm on a single plate), and the ski worked well.  This confirms my theory that the ski is certainly different but not significantly so.  The flat spot has been moved forward.  It moves off the 2nd wake in a more confident manner and maintains angle with less effort (or better w/ same effort).  It maintains speed better thru the backside of the turn.  Once I moved the bindings forward, the tip stayed down w/o any stall at the backside.  I didn't notice the changes until 35 off.  28 and 32 felt similar to my Z7.  Haven't cut to 38 yet but now that I feel I have the ski set up properly (for me), I'll try it later this week.

All in all, another great D3 ski.  Not a radically new ski but a refinement of an already great ski.  I could ride either with similar results but the ST is a bit more user friendly at the shorter line lengths and therefore should help my consistency.

The numbers I finally arrived at:

6.870 / 2.501 / .740 / 7 deg wing / bindings 30.75

 

[Roger]

jdarwin,

Thanks for the posting and numbers. I have been doing most of my tuning to get the onside to feel more natural (seems like I have to help that side a bit). The offiside is awesome no matter what numbers I use. I am one hole forward with the RS-1 plate which puts me about 30.25". I believe, based on your settings that I will try another half or full hole forward and try to match your 30.75" setting. I believe that may bring my onside to where I like (IE: I too think the tip could engage sooner on that side).

[jdarwin]

Roger:

As stated, I'm on a single plate (Reflex front / HO rear) so it is difficult to gauge exactly the DFT.  On my "old" Z7, the middle hole on my plate was 30.5" (I'm on a 68" version of both skis).  I started in the middle hole on the ST but moved forward one hole and found the ski worked better.  Depending on how I gauge my measurements, I'm somewhere between 30.5 and 30.75 w/ my front binding.  Again, I'm not too concerned w/ the exact measurement - it feels good and that's what matters.

I'm not 100% certain that my fin settings are where I need them and I may "fine tune" it a bit more but for now, it's working well.  BTW, water temps were 83.  As the water warms up more, I may find further adjustments are required.

 

[Roger]

Thanks for that. Mine's a 67, so we'll see how a move forward effects everything. I too have a single plate double boot setup, so measuring is only so accurate. Doesn't cost anything to try it though

[Gloersen]

http://picasaweb.google.com/USViking/VictoryLake#slideshow/5485005370171100386Have probably done 5o adjustments on the fin, always in search for a consistent offside

 

The ski would rock for me, then my 2B's would start to fall apart.

 

All leading to trying many different fin dimensions.

 

Became increasingly curious as to why it seemed the depth always was greater at each re-adjust; blamed it on poor measuring technique in the hot sun.

 

Today checked depth after each set. 1 short set, it deepened .002, 1 long set it increased from 2.512 to 2.517, loosened the clamp, knocked it back up in the block and it was back at 2.512.

Took the block & fin off the ski, held the fin block halves together containing the fin, pressed by hand, the front was holding the fin, but the back not contacting the rear tab of the fin at all, not even after tightening the rear clamp hex screw, could pull the back of the fin right out easily

 

Turns out the rear DFT set screw when placed forward past the threaded portion of the block into the recess bored out in the clamping halves was preventing the rear portion of the mating surfaces of the clamp from contacting the rear fin tab.

 

After removing the rear set screw, the problem was solved, DFT easy enough to adjust in its absence.

 

This would explain why in my sets I would keep getting wider & earlier into 2B (LFF) but having progressively broader turns and fighting for 3B.

 

Looking forward to getting back some conistency.

 

Never had a problem like this with any D3 fin block, it didn't seem to be a problem when running the fin further back & much shallower.

 

Have been preferring of late, 2.510/6.898/.742/8(back) or at least for the first pass or two.http://picasaweb.google.com/USViking/VictoryLake#slideshow/5485005370171100386