Questions to entertain on a cold winter night.

[fu_man]

So in order to survive the long winter I have borrowed stacks of my buddy's old WS magazine from the late 80's and early 90's. As I have read them a few questions that come to mind.

 

As of 89 the top speed for all divisions was slower (OM was still 35mph and OW was 32). When were they bumped up and why? It's not like guys were into 41 and 43 off yet. What were the complications/issueswith changing the top speed? Do any of you think its time to bump the speeds up at this point in time to 37mph for OM?

 

The slalom ski articles were still debating the pros and cons of concave design vs tunnel design. To my knowledge, pretty much all skis today are concave and the tunnel design is obsolete. Is this just because they hold an edge better? There was also a debate regarding stiff skis vs more flexible skis. With today's construction techniques and materials being very different would today's skis be considered more flexible or stiff? Is there still a wide variation in this with top end skis?

 

Have boat wakes gotten significantly better since then? I regularly ski behind a 94 and a 95 PS 190. From former posts here (and Lucky's mouth) the early 90's up to the 94 PS are considered "holy grail" slalom boats. Those wakes are pretty sweet. How do brand new boats compare?

 

I have been also wondering if guys really have a preference with regards to the different wakes from the different manufacturers. I know the pros have their sponsorships so they will not give an unbiased answer, so maybe some of you guys that have been around and are into deep short line can give insight. I get that a trick skier really cares about the wake, but assuming that all the tournament boats have a buttery soft wake, are all powered by ZO, and you are slicing right through them anyway, is there a significantly different feel to MC vs MB vs SN? Do you care which boat you get at a tournament?

 

Thanks for your thoughts!

[Wish]

Boats,

Each manufacture has had hulls that have been good and bad from year to year with the purest slalom wakes. MC Has had awful years and some great yrs (1992-3-4 for example). The 1997 SN 196 was a game changer (especially 15-22 off). As of late they are all good IMHO. I think improvements will only be slight in the near future. Where improvements can be made is the long line slower wakes for Jr and older or beginning skiers. From what I've heard Centurian CarbonPro has done just that. I found the 196 (TSC 1) is the best of the older boats for this and is the reason I picked one as I get older and my daughter is coming up in the ski scene. I think we all have are favorites in touneys for varied reasons brand loyalty is a big one I think. I hope to get a chance to ski behind the CarbonPro. Will be nice to see and ski behind something other than the big 3. Best quoate I've heard came from an elevan year old talking to himself as he climbed out of the water after his tourney set "Not bad for a MasterCraft".

[A_B]

If you can find the article on LISA, which was a pull meter hooked up to a plotter tested by Dave Benzel, I would like to get a copy of it.

 

It might have been a Spray Magazine article, but I don't remember.

[lpskier]

Ah, I've been in the sport for over 40 years and have no recollection of a top speed of 35 mph in slalom. Jumping, yes, slalom. no. It has always been 36 since I started competing in the late 60s.

[6balls]

I don't ski longer than 28 off, and I like all of today's boats in terms of wake; subtle differences between all but not enough to affect my performance. Last thing on my mind at a tourney is what boat I get. I see more differences in the interior/features in terms of a purchase decision based on space, cross over needs etc.

Like wish I also love the TSC 1,2,3 models of the 196, and the Response LX is just fine, too.

As for MC, even before the '91-'94 they had killer wakes, just too much spray and a power deficit. Until a few years ago I regularly skied a '87 MC 190 w/PP classic. Times were good, wakes were fantastic, but shortline spray was awful particularly in a headwind.

I quit skiing it mainly due to power deficit...training behind 240 hp carb and showing up at a ZO tourney was no good. The power deficit combined w/slow water created a completely different timing in the balls in order to do well than what is required in a tourney.

Last year was my best in terms of consistent tourney performance. This was in part due to the transition from old carb 190 to GT40 196, in part due to the switch to a properly set up Razor, in part due to daily talks w/Razor1 on theory, and in part due BOS forum.

[fu_man]

lpskier I was surprised to read this. I too thought it was 36 mph. This is what I'm seeing. It is Rick McCormick's "Ask an expert" column from WS May 1989. The question was specifically about slalom scoring. Is this a misprint?http://static.cl1.vanilladev.com/ballofspray.vanillaforums.com/uploads/FileUpload/e3/4be7e9c305ffc7aa2d0d50bd942426.pdf

[Chef23]

That doesn't seem right to me regarding the speeds. I remember skiing 36 mph as a Boys and Mens 1 age skier in the 80s.

[Bruce_Butterfield]

Those speeds are definitely for jump.

 

Slalom speeds for Boys through M2 was 36, Junior boys 34. Girls (I think) through most of the older Women's divisions was 34. Don't know about junior girls, but it may have been 34 as well.

 

It wasn't until they separated the kids divisions from 2 (junior and boys) to 3 (B1, B2, B3) in the mid 90's that the slalom speeds were moved down for the kids and really old folks.

[Ham_Wallace]

Those are Jump Speeds.

[lpskier]

Ham should know. He is a year older than me.