Than's Nano One REVIEW

[Than_Bogan]

I think I finally understand this ski well enough to write a semi-competent review:

 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GJuzTFy2uXyL7ekjKBBoQ8IzgOqSzSe3sAIDwB2Jh0E/preview

 

I may change or add to this with more experience, but I'd be pretty darn surprised if anything fundamental changed from here out.

[Bulldog]

@than_bogan Great Review!! If I had a spare 2K I would get one!!!

[Than_Bogan]

Ok, should all be working now. I'm mildly incompetent with commercial software.

 

@scotchipman I can definitely see how that would be convenient, but I prefer to keep only one master copy so that any edits I make are in one place. Fixed a typo already!

[6balls]

Very useful review, my friend. If I had easy access, would try one mostly due to yours and Horton's success given the similarity (until recently re: Horton) of our tourney average. As of this a.m. I've got 10 38's this year (ran 4 and a complete today), which 8 more than last year. I also have two practice PB's this year of 2 and 3 at 39 and WAY more trips around 5 ball.

If I knew $2K would make me a 50%'er rather than a 5% 'er on the purple, I would jump on it. Would be fun to compare to the Razor as it's my first full season on it...the Razor has definitely become my friend and thus I'm likely to run it another season and continue to work on me. Once I truly see what others see, that working on me is a lost cause, I will change skis again : )

[slalomboy96]

mine showed up in NZ today... sunshine in the weekend and lots of smiling.. I hope.

Question: this nano one appears to be painted on the lower 1/4 of the bottom of the ski through the fin box, do any of the other nano ones out there have the same?

[Boody]

@slalomboy96, yes they are all like that

[slalomboy96]

Nice, thanks.... Looking forward to a rip on it. Winters lost over...

[MrJones]

Good info Than. Notice that your settings are close to stock except for fin length. You are a lot shorter than what I have been hearing people run. You mind giving the progression of how you got there?

[Than_Bogan]

@Mr.Jones Never touched the fin. Seeing as both of my skis were within 0.005" of that length out of the box, I suspect it's just a difference in caliper and/or measurement technique?

[Than_Bogan]

@6balls. Thanks to injuries and other life-related interruptions, I don't actually have a huge number of -38 attempts racked up yet. But if I had to pull some numbers out of my ass, I'd say I've gone from under 1% at -38 to about 10% -- and that feels like it's still climbing. So I wouldn't say it's inconceivable this thing would take you from 5% to 50%, although obviously I wouldn't place a very large bet on that!

[Horton]

@Than_Bogan before United took my ski away I would say I went from 5% on other skis to maybe 33% on the N1.

 

As you have said I am having a good year so it is hard to say how much of that is the ski.

[Razorskier1]

Hard to say what my 38 percentage is. What is different this year (at this time of year) is that I am more consistent at being deep on 38. For example, I have run a score of 5 more times this year than I can count, then got cautious on the 5 turn and didn't get to six. In prior years it was either I ran the pass or got 3. This is definitely improvement, although I would estimate my number of completed passes is pretty close to the same year over year in the 15-20 range.

[Than_Bogan]

Forgot to comment on the weird look -- I forgot about it already! Just added that at the very bottom.

[DW]

@ Than, first, great review.

 

I noticed you indicated previous skis, can you make a performance comparison to previous units (how does this ski compare to the 9100 and 9600 in particular for me) as to how many buoys you would get for each, or % best pass for each is a pretty good criteria, or even PB (normalized if possible).

[Than_Bogan]

@DW Thanks!

 

I'm so hesitant to put a number on how much better I get, because I am deeply aware of how difficult it can be to get a good measurement, much less how dangerous it is to make one up!

 

But as long as I emphasize that the following is based purely on feel and has no statistical validity whatsoever, I'm willing to give you some numbers that have been in my head:

 

Firstly, from the 9100 to the 9900sl, the improvements are incremental. I'm not sure I would have ever left my 9100 or my 9600 had they not ultimately failed (broken and broken down, respectively). I do suspect that if I jumped from the 9100 to the 9900sl, I'd be pretty impressed, but I don't have that experience, so I'd be REALLY making stuff up if I tried to estimate it.

 

As to the gain from the N1, I think it depends greatly on where you are in the pass. For me -38 is a pass that I was just starting to grasp. 3's and 4's had become quite common. On that pass, I really feel the N1 averages almost +2 buoys, because it's just enough of a nudge from "sorta get it" to "get it."

 

-39 is a pass that I don't grasp at all. Every so often over the years I've eeked outside 2 ball, but basically I'm going no where. The N1 has yet to produce a substantial difference at -39 (although admittedly on only about 5 tries). I guess I *think* it's made an improvement, but it's from "no chance in hell" to "no chance."

 

That said, I really expect to learn something about -39 next season, because I feel I'll be running -38 quite a few times. Maybe not a very high percentage, but once a week by midseason seems very believable.

 

As far as % success at -38, I can say with reasonable certainly that my success rate in the past was under 1%. I can say with MUCH LESS certainty that I feel I'm around 10% on the N1 (assuming fairly good conditions). This maybe-10x improvement is probably the biggest reason I am so darn high on this ski. -38 just doesn't seem THAT hard now. Heck, I damn near got one last night in crazy backwash and poor light.

 

Also interesting (but I ultimately cut from my review because it's so damn long already): After I broke my first N1, I had the opportunity to set up my 9900 again. I surprised myself when I realized I really didn't want to ski on my 9900. It already seemed obsolete. And that's despite the fact that I had run -38 with it just the week before getting on the N1 (though in absolutely perfect conditions including a light headwind.)

[Razorskier1]

If I had $2000, if I had $2000, I'd buy me a new N1 a new N1 that would be cool . . . (c'mon, somebody sing it with me!) Oh, forgot. I've got one in college and two more on the way -- I'm not going to have $2000 for another decade!

[thager]

Boo Hoo! Me too. Mines in college also. Have to keep the 02 196 10 more years. Group hug!!

[Razorskier1]

@thager -- same for the 05 197TT. 1200 hours now -- probably 2500 before it leaves me!

[thager]

@Razorskier1 Just over 500 on mine? Little TLC and they last a very long time. Boat will probably be around much longer than I am. New prices have gotten way too far out of line for me.

[Skoot1123]

Nice review @Than. Will probably have to get a newer ski off SIA - two young children now!

[DW]

@ Than, thanks that is exactly the type of feedback I was hoping for understanding the concept of a statistical sample of 1. Interesting comment on your previous ski feeling absolete after a switchback. I wonder if that would go away after a few rides (see below).

 

One thing I have noticed over time testing some sort of machinery (bicycles/race cars/ski's) is that when you do an A-B-A test, the return to A the second time results in a very different feel from your feeling on it originally. I would be curious if others feel the same way.

[Than_Bogan]

@DW That's a great point about the return. I bet my 9900 would feel like it was turning crazy fast. But I'm nearly certain it wouldn't feel as good as my N1.

 

This N1 lets me get away with so much crap.

 

Yesterday, I was skiing absolutely terribly. I was so frustrated with my complete inability to do anything the right way. Hips dragging all the time, off balance in the turns, weak pulls and handle high. Ugh, hurts to even recount it.

 

But then when I looked back on the day, I realized I had run -35 four times (with just one miss I think), including at least twice with a tailwind (and a touch of backwash). And I also managed two 2.5s and a 3.5 at -38.

 

In a really bizarre way, it almost annoyed me to realize I could get scores-that-I-very-recently-considered-quite-good while skiing like a total dufus. A day like that "should" be more like missing nearly all my -35s.

[DW]

@Than interesting comments on your performance when you feel like you are skiing poorly. Implies the ski has a very large and flat performance window, as opposed to a small and peaky window. Certainly helpful when skiing on days when the body does not do what it should. . .

[MrJones]

I agree with this. I looked at some video of me on the 9900 and the N1 this weekend. At times the 9900 would just rip it. At times it might stall or overturn due to driver error. The feel of the N1 is that it is less sensitive to this. So long as there is not trade off in top end it should be great. (From watching Todd R. it doesn't seem this will be an issue.)

[Than_Bogan]

@DW I wanted to say to my ski "Ya know, when I am skiing THIS badly, it's OK to punish me a little more. Otherwise I'll think you don't care."

 

:-)

[SkiJay]

Haha! Careful what you wish for ...

[Than_Bogan]

@SkiJay You're right! My most recent set I was actually skiing better, but the conditions were awful and my results were, too. Didn't run a single -35 in two sets. (I think that's the first time I all season that I completed zero -35s on a day that I actually tried that length.)

 

But I don't think I've lost it quite yet. Better conditions and a little more sleep and I should be challenging -38 again.