Mid vs Classic

[Than_Bogan]

I've heard of a lot of people who moved to the Mid shape and loved it. But this is a bit of a biased sample because typically I'm only asking people I see actually ON a Mid.

 

So I'm wondering if there are some folks out there who tried the Mid and didn't like it, and if so if you can try to comment a bit on why (with the understanding on my part that the "why" of something not working can be extremely hard to pin down).

 

Thanks in advance.

 

Why I am asking: I'm vaguely considering demoing a Carbon Nano, but the time I'd be willing to allot to such an experiment would be very brief. Most likely I'd only be willing to try (at most) one shape.

[icewebdan]

I am in the same position, if anybody can point out the difference when you are skiing a mid and a regular. I also see the mid are shorter... probably make a big change?

[ktm300]

I have skied both and like them both. I stuck with the regular. The mid is narrower under the boots than the regular with more volume at the ends. The mid tracks like a train. It was too much for me. I rode it stock. I can see where the 2.50 setup that Chad Scott rides would help tame it. Never tried it though. The regular is balanced, smooth and turns well. For me, it was easier to maintain width on the regular and although the regular does not track as hard as the mid, it got me to the point I needed to be on the other side with no dramatics. There were times on the mid where at the second wake I was as early as I had ever been on any ski. Didn't do me any good. A deeper setting may have kept me out there longer but, too early was letting me get sucked back in a bit. I dug the smoothness of the regular. My ski partner looks better on the regular than any ski in the past decade. Try em both.

[Than_Bogan]

THANKS!

 

I'm not familiar with the 2.50 setup -- can you elaborate (or give me a link)?

[Ed_Johnson]

Than,

 

Brent is correct. I am finding my Mid Nano to be quite a challenge to find the right setup. Curently tried 1, 2, and 3 Ventral Wings. No magic bullet yet.

 

The Regular Mid is so easy to ride I would put a 15 off skier on it. I've owned the 9900, 9900 Mid, and 9900 Wide Ride. Simply put, the Mid has the speed of the Reg. 9900, with the turning capability of the Wide. Best of both worlds.

 

I have the latest edition 9900 Mid, 66" Right Foot, 228 AMP, World Edition for Sale. It fits weights of 190 - 250 LB skiers. This ski is virtually brand new for only $950.....ED

[ktm300]

Than, I just looked at Goode site and they have 2.50 listed as stock number. Maybe my memory fails but, I think last year they had a shallower setting listed.

[Guto]

For a 15 to 22off skier would

you recomend the mid or the regular nano

Thanks

[jaredH20]

My Brother is getting the 9960 should he go mid or traditional. He is not a very aggressive skier but has a great style, he runs into 32 off.

[icewebdan]

From what I see the mid shape is base on the new shape of the snow ski. Wider at the ends and norrower in the middle. Sure it work good on snow (for turning) Does it work on water?

[Wish]

JaredH2O. what speed?? 34mph= Mid. 36mph= could be either. IMHO

[jaredH20]

36mph