D3 z7 xt

[ktm300]

I always have liked D3 as a company. They don't BS everybody and sell skis with known flex problems. They even put the flex #'s on the ski. However, the skis have always, to me, been slow and skied buoy to buoy. Turned well but, went buoy to buoy. How does the new ski compare with regard to speed and maintaining a line or direction off the second wake? Thanks.

[jdarwin]

I have skied on D3's for the past 4 seasons.  I'm not certain that every new model is better than the one before.  I skied the most consistent on the RCX.  Unfortunately, it began to break down after two seasons and I moved to the Z7.  The Z7 was quicker out of the buoy but wasn't as consistent in the turns.  I had to be more technical.  If I was, I scored better.  The ST may be an improvement for some but for me, the "regular" Z7 worked better. 

As for "buoy to buoy", D3's require some handle control off the 2nd wake in order to create space at the buoy.  They are not "quick" but they are pretty fast.  They require a bit more effort to ski wide but reward you with a consistent, carving turn.  Not all skis suit all skiers.  If you are accustomed to the Elite, the D3 will feel slower.  But you must be very technical and ride the middle of the ski in order for the Elite to perform well.  D3's allow you to be less than perfect and still perform well.

[Horton]

Below is my opinion.  Everyone is welcome to express theirs.

On my list of 10 best skis of the last 10 years the X5 is near the top. The X5 and the Custom X that preceded it are both commonly referred to as “slow”. It is true that the X5 requires handle control skills to obtain width.  It is also true that a lot of kick ass 38 & 39 off skiers still love this ski.

After YEARS of R&D and a number of models,  D3 came out with the Z7. This ski is not slow by any definition. Fasters ski ever? Heck, I do not know but who cares. What does “fast” really mean is and is really better?  It is wrong to brand D3 as the “Slow ski company”.  Just not true.  D3 makes well built and consistent high quality skis.  

While we are on the subject of misconceptions and generalizations about ski factories, it is true that HO Skis are designed for people who ride the tail. (Except for the Monza, A1, S1 and CO-X)

[Horton]

My last years review of the Z7 http://www.ballofspray.com/gear-reviews/203-2010-d3-z7

[tru-jack]

Horton and jtm, I'm also trying to move from an x5 to a z7 or z7st.  there are better deals on the z7 as it's last years ski, have you tried or have any experience re: the difference between the z7 or z7st? thanks

[Bruce_Butterfield]

I rode the Z7 all last year and tried the ST for a half dozen sets this spring.  My impression of the ST is that is closer to the regular Z7 than any other 2 skis I’ve ridden that were “suppose to be identicalâ€.  I think that says a lot for D3’s manufacturing processes and tolerances – they are making intentional changes that are smaller than most other companies manufacturing tolerances.

 

For me, the ST did some things slightly better than the regular Z7 and some things slightly worse – but those were well within ‘my’ day to day variation in skiing.  On net, I think it was a wash.

 The most remarkable thing about the Z7 is that for every skier I’ve watched on it, the ski is doing exactly what it should.  I have never seen that in any other ski.  I think it is the easiest to ride, high performance ski out there.

[tru-jack]

thanks Bruce, I'm sold.  Any opinion on z7 size re: z7 compared to x5?  I'm 212 lbs or so, and am on a 67.5 x5 but think I should be on a 68", any thoughts? thanks

[Bruce_Butterfield]

tru-jack,

 

68 for sure.  I'm 195 and ski onthe 67, but I'm on the border.  I keep thinking I should try the 68, but haven't got around to it.

[jdarwin]

I believe the ST was conceived to sell more skis - period.  Nothing radically different from the Z7.  In fact, most prefer the "regular" Z7 to the ST.  That said, their new ski, the X7 is a revised X5.  If it is an "improved" X5, it will be a winner. 

[DW]

Tru-jack,  I had the opportunity to test both the X5 and RCX under the watchful eye of Paul and personally liked both for many of the reasons stated above.  Both were very smooth, symmetrical skis that were extremely easy to get right up to peak performance on.  Paul steered me to the X5 as I am  light and the X5 is a bit softer.  If you consider an alternate ski, you might try the RCX or Z7 v. the X5.

[tru-jack]

thanks guys and I have been talking to Paul and I'm going to order a 68 today.  one of a couple of leftovers from last years 'regular' Z7s.  I also heard the X7 will be released at nationals and be an option in their top of the line skis.  can't wait.  When I demo rode a z7st it was a bit small for my weight as is my current x5.  I was nice and smooth, but the conditins were a bit rolly so I didn't get a reall good feel for it.  BUT when I returned to the x5 I immediately missed the z7 and realized the physical effort was less and the speed between balls was much improved. funny how I missed it more, than I appreciated it in the first place.  thanks everyone and cant wait for the new ski...

[mopowpow]

You'll love your Z7.  I went from a Nomad RC to the Z7 ST this year.  It is the most comfortable ski I have ever been on.  When you're skiing good it is great, when you're skiing bad (like yesterday) it doesn't punish you.  The offside turns are  awsome and will turn no matter what horrible position your body is in.  One of my friends got last year's Z7, we were talking & don't think you can take a nasty crash on the ski.

[MrJones]

Good to hear from you Bruce. Did you ever demo that Elite? Just wanted to know your thoughts on a comparison if so.

[skidawg]

Bruce, if u try the new elite, try the new 68, I am 195 & it is so much easier for us larger swervers!

[A_B]

 

 

Is the Elite a little wider than "standard" ?

 

[Horton]

It is wider than skis a few years ago. The 65.5 Elite has almost the exact outline as the same size Z7. (measured by eye- NOT technically sound data )

[A_B]

I looked at the Elite but I have been known to pop the handle on deepwater starts on occasion and I could envision knocking the whole tip off of it!!

[skidawg]

Don't see that happening w the elite, very solid ski with an execellent core material! What are u riding to avoid handle pops

[bmiller3536]

Mopowow    "One of my friends got last year's Z7, we were talking & don't think you can take a nasty crash on the ski. "

 I think a nasty crash is possible on any ski, all depends on who is trying to hang on.

 

[A_B]

I had a 9500 look like a pickle fork dragster after a handle pop and also took a chunk out of my Radar.

 

I just thought the 1/4" thickness up front on the Elite may not be as resistant.

 

Back on a 67" 9500 and waiting for a 68" Z1 to show up. Didn't really like the A1 I was trying this year.

[skidawg]

If u can get ur hands on one, try a new 68 elite, u won't b dissappointed

[ForrestGump]

I had some SERIOUS handle strikes to my elite and it didn't even leave a mark.

[MrJones]

So what kinda shape is the front of the Strada in Shane???http://www.ballofspray.com/vanillaforum/js/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-laughing.gif

[Bruce_Butterfield]

Yes, I have been riding the 67 Elite for the last 2 weeks and I think it will work better for my style (I stand by my high opinion of the Z7).  Its no where near as smooth as the Z7, but the Elite loves to create space and backside the buoy.  Acceleration out of the buoy is also better, but you have to be ready to hang on.  The Elite works great if you ski aggressively and with a lot of angle.

When I skied with Andy, he recommended the 67 vs the 68 for me and did not mention a new 68, so the rumor mill is alive and well.  

AB, the 67 Elite is pretty much the same width as the Z7, but the Z7 is a little wider than some older skis.  My 67 Z7 ‘felt’ like the same size as my 68 Monza, FWIW.

[Horton]

Bruce,

What are your settings?

[A_B]

 

I got in the Z1st this weekend, didn't touch JD settings and then went to stock.  I have to admit, I did not miss a deepwater start all summer (not that I have skied that much), but I missed the first 2 on the Z1 and missed another in the second round (at stock settings).  This is telling me that the ski is not setup right for me.  Goes hard left on start - right foot forward.

On my offside turn, the ski puts me on my ear and runs down the buoyline and requires a lot of effort to get back under me.  Could be why it rolls over and hard left on start??

In general, the flex numbers are on the lighter side, which you would think would make it turn like a demon.

Front 152

FWD 130

Mid 90

Tail  69

It seems like the onside turn and pull are okay.

Fin is at 6.925 tips, 2.520, and .750 flat.  Ran 7 degree upside down in top (normal) hole location.

My  inclination is to raise the back or drop the front.  Thoughts?

 

[jdarwin]

AB - the numbers that were on the ski when you got it are the numbers that work best.  6.925 is WAY too long - ski won't move out and create space in the preturn w/ a long fin.  2.520 is WAY too deep.  The ski won't finish the turn - it will track down the lake and make big "bus turns" with a deep fin.  .750 DFT is fine.  I ran my bindings one hole forward on that ski to get the tip to engage in the preturn. 

We've had approx 6 Z7's on my site over the past year.  ALL of them ran 6.870-6.875 tips.  Depth was 2.480 - 2.507 depending on size.  DFT = stock on all skis.  The flex numbers are about right.  Any stiffer in the tail, and the tip would engage too quick and the ski would not set in at the buoy. 

[A_B]

 

I tried your setup first and then went to stock, I did move the bindings ahead for the second round as well, trying to egage the tip better.  I wrote your numbers down, and will go back to them but take some depth out and try one hole ahead again.  My Animal in the middle seems to be around 30.25 and stock is 30.5.  Onside felt good, but offside was way off for me.

Thanks

 

 

[clemsondave]

My 2010 Z7 66" numbers:

6.980 tips

2.515

0.760 Hot water 85+

0.726 Cold water 85-

29 3/8 to heel of front boot

8* wing

 

 

Mine turns so hard, I'm having to put stronger Dual Lock on. Of course, I get there pretty early, so turning is easy. I typically tune my ski to get me to the buoy line when/where I want and to give me the speed I'm comfortable with (a lot). If I can do that, the turn is easy.

 

I'm going to try JD's numbers before the Mid comes in just b/c I'm curious.

[A_B]

 

 

CD,

are your cold/hot water settings backwards?

 

[clemsondave]

Nope, I'm backwards from most people. I also follow Schnitz's philosophy on fin tuning. For me, moving the fin forward makes it noticeably faster. I tune very little, but when I do, like I mentioned, I tune to achieve the speed/angle/width that I want. If I get that, the turn will happen automatically.

 

Basically, I tried stuff till it worked for me. So many theories out there. IF I had a theory about this movement, I'd say that moving the fin back proportionally moves your weight towards the front of the ski. More ski in the water means more drag. More drag = slower. Regardless of theory, I noticed my ski was slow in 92* water. I moved it forward and got my speed back instantly. Also, for the front/back fin movement, I do a ton (0.030 to 0.040). Only a few thou for the other measurements.

[A_B]

 

 I went out tonight and crammed one round in.

Before all this info was revealed today, I had set the fin similar to a Goode standard fin and didn't have time to adjust.

Setup was about 6.870 jaws, 2.450, and .710, and 9 degrees.  The ski felt a ton better.  Again, I am semi-free skiing at 28 off 34.2 mph, going around and shadowing some buoys, but trying to get back into skiing, so not exactly pushing the envelope.  I think the key was the correct ratio of length to depth, where before I think the ski was out of balance, at least for me.

My thoughts are to add depth, dft and length, working my way towards stock numbers.   But in general, the ski felt as good as my old trusty 9500, and effort was a little less behind the boat.  Oh yea, made all my deepwater starts too. http://www.ballofspray.com/vanillaforum/js/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-smile.gif

[Bruce_Butterfield]

67 Elite settings:

Bindings 29.25

L 6.898

D 2.512

DFT 0.78 flat

Andy's settings

L 6.850

DFT 0.79 flat

Note that the fin clamp does not have set screws, so I don't sweat a few thousands, but I did intentionally add the 0.050 to the length as I had trouble turning the off side when I demo'd the ski.  I haven't felt a need to change anything else yet.