seriously considering the HO Co X, SL or regular?

[DooSPX]

I unfortunately do not have access to a course on our lake. Its a large public lake with a few nice quiet area's to ski, but no course and the city will not let me put one in either. Darn it! The only courses are about 2 hours away, and I unfortunately do not have enough time on weekends to drive there. One is on Todd's lake from WSM with his buddy Mike in Orlando and the other is a private lake in Tampa which a friend lives on. So needless to say, I get to a course about 2% of the time and free ski with imaginary gates and balls to try and work on my form and body position. I'm thinking the regular Co X will be more what I am needing with it being more forgiving in not so perfect water. Am I correct? I currently ski on a System 8 with heavy bindings, and from holding a Co X at Performance Ski, it's still MUCH lighter then my ski. Also, I ski at 15 off @ 34mph free ski.

 

Thank you guys for the help! BOS Rocks!

[Wish]

@DooSPX where do you live? The CoX is a good ski but I think with the number of S2s on Ski-it-Again ($500), you may want to consider that ski as well. IMHO it is more stable and just as easy on the body. I liked the CO-Xsl a lot though. Have seen several new for cheap here and there on line. There are a number of other skis to consider if you want to move away from HO. Radar Senate ©. O'Brien Siege, Connelly V © to name a few. Try before you buy if you can. If not, going from a System 8 to any of these skies will be a big jump for the better.

[DooSPX]

@Wish thank you for the reply. I live in Sebring, FL. Basically center of the state. I have considered the S2 as well as Radar Senate. There are two HO Co X on SIA for 300 and under that I am eying. I figure that the 50/50 core like the Senate, Vice or Co X would be better for 98% free skiing on a 9,200+ acre lake?

[DooSPX]

Anyone else have a thought on Non carbon 50/50 vs. carbon for my need?

[buski]

For what it's worth I free ski at a similar level, am even slower in the course, and am also on public water. I have an S2 and really like it. Haven't tried the other skis but presumably the carbon one's would be fine, and if you can find a good used one would be comparable costs or maybe less.

[mcskier41]

IMHO, go with the CO X SL since it has the adjustable fin box. the regular CO x does not. I have skied the CO X SL and was very easy to adjust to first time out. Haven't tried the S2, but it's similar design as the CO X so I don't think you can wrong with it either. Good luck!

[mateja]

@buski - what size S2 did you go with? I'm considering as S2 for myself and feel like I fall between the 66.5 and 67.5 and wondering if anyone has an opinion on if better to size up or down on the S2. I'm about 190 lbs. and ski 34 MPH.

[DooSPX]

@mcskier41 thank you! I did not know that the Co X does not have the adjustable fin block. Thank you very much. there is a Co X SL on SIA for 275, I am waiting to hear back about the condition and shipping.

 

[Wish]

@buski 66.5 unless you gain weight. How tall are you? Me, 5'10 185 on a 66.5. @mcskier41, the S2 and CoXsl are great skies. But they are designed completely different in shape and ski completely different.

[DooSPX]

Does anyone know if there is a design difference between the 2010 and new Co X SL? Or just graphics?

[Wish]

None. Just graphics and name. My buddy took it deep 39.

[mateja]

@Wish - I'm 5'10" 190. Mid season I'm probably closer to 185 when skiing every weekend.

[DooSPX]

@Wish thank you! Now I am just waiting on the seller from SIA to get back to me about a 2010 used one season (supposedly) for 275.

[Wish]

@meteja 66.5 should work just fine. @DooSPX Good luck.

[DooSPX]

Thanks!

[mcskier41]

Hey Wish,

could you help: I've only skied the CO X SL and wondering what differences you notice between it and the S2. Kinda looking a purchasing one or the other - thks!

[Wish]

COXsl in IMO is a ski that can go as far as you want it to go even though it's seen as lower tear. It can turn on a dime when pushed and take off with ease. But smooth when left alone. But when you push the tail around it can over turn easily if you're not careful. It gets soooo wide its almost weird. The S2 also gets wide but is the opposite in the turn. It wants to track on it's line and time and does not like to be forced through a turn. It just wont happen. But very stable out of the turn. I really have to be in a very bad position for it to stop at the finish of the turn or blow out. Was dumped OTF many times on the CoX. I think the S2 has a bigger sweet spot but if you get in trouble, counting on snapping it around a turn is no bueno. But, there is less need for that when you're in good shape most of the time. I picked the S2 to basically force myself to stop snapping turns and taking hits in a attempt to extend my skiing past old age (whatever that is). Want to be more efficient. S2 seems very sensitive to boot and fin placement. Small moves can make big differences. The CoX not as much accept DFT. I really liked them both. They both ride high on the water. Both are low drag (step bottom) and hold speed through the turn and little tug of war if any is needed to make them go. They are different enough to consider trying both if you can. Similarity ends at "they both have a step bottom". There are trade offs in both. Horton has reviews on both (Gear Review top of page) and basically nails it.

[bogboy]

I skied all winter on my s2, and had a ball at 34mph. Then I took it to the course, and only got about 25 percent success rate, because it wants at least 28mph. So I went back to my 2012 triumph, at 26mph, and I am getting almost all my passes at 26mph. So, I will try to increase my speed, and then get back on my s2. I do think skiing all winter on my s2 made me a stronger skier. I guess it's a good problem to have. Last summer when I tried the co ex, I thought I would really like it, but it wanted to bite me a couple times in the turns.

[XR6Hurricane]

Please expand on the comments about going OTF on the Co-X. I'm getting ready to buy one and I'm not sure I understand the correlation between its turning behavior and the tendency to go OTF (I'm assuming you're talking about going OTF at the 2nd wake?). I was told that the Co-X is more forgiving of mistakes than my old Concept is and the Concept has never reached out and bitten me in 14 years. In fact there have been many times I thought I was going to go OTF on it and didn't.

 

Thanks.

[bogboy]

@xr6hurricane well, I guess, IMO, the s2 skied better for me than the co ex. I respectfully suggest you try both. I think the s2 rips free skiing, and very forgiving at 34 mph. It's because of my beginning course capability that I temporarily went back to my 2012 triumph, which I skied on today at hilltop. Thank you bruce and Ed. I also just bought my wife a new 2013 triumph, because I took mine back, and she told me that she liked the 2012 a lot better than her old one. Also, we have one ski buddy who has a co ex, and likes it. We have about 4 ski buddy's who have s2's, and I noticed at my membership ski lake that on the ski rafter storage, there are about 4 s2's and no co ex's. regarding your question about the bite, I ment that the co ex kind of shoved me over down to the side at times.

[Wish]

@XR6Hurricane guess I should have clarified. OTF to me is whenever or wherever a ski pitches you over the tip. I've only had 2 bad OTF off the second wake and both took me off the water for a week. One was on the S2 and the other was on a Goode. It was the bow not the arrow as the cause of both. Never had that happen on the CoXsl but have been pitched over the tip at the finish of a turn on it as I overturned. Mostly do to me not necessarily the ski. If your jumping from a 14 year old Concept to a CoX, I truly believe you will love it. Especially how much wider you will get as well as how much less physical effort you will need as you ski it. That is a huge jump in performance IMHO. Go for it if it's a good deal. I tested that ski for 3 weeks along side of a handfull of others. Liked them all for various reasons. But that ski just made me smile....a lot.

[XR6Hurricane]

@Wish and @bogboy, thanks, that makes more sense. I've also had 2 OTFs off the second wake over a period of about 15 years (one on an early Western glass ski and one on a EP Superformer) and have decided I'm not having #3.

 

I'm hoping the Co-X will be easier to hold on edge; if there's one complaint I have about the Concept, that's it, but it's probably the skier.

[Horton]

I think the COX sl is maybe the most under rated ski on the market. It is not a low, mid range ski. It kicks ass.

[Wish]

I need to start making my posts more like @Horton s . Short and to the point. Kicks ass.....I like that.

[XR6Hurricane]

@Horton, what about the standard layup Co-X? That's the one I'm looking at. Have you been on one and compared it to the SL?

[Horton]

@XR6Hurricane I have not skied on it but... the shape is the same so it is clearly a solid design. It is going to be more forgiving but slower. There is no need to go light core and Carbon unless you are into ... maybe 28 off or more

[XR6Hurricane]

Thanks @Horton...just ordered it this afternoon. Looking forward to getting on it for the new season.

[DooSPX]

Well, purchased a Co X SL on SIA for under $300. Looking forward to getting it. I am thinking of the Radar Vector front boot with an HO ARTP. Anything thoughts on that?

[Wish]

@DooSPX Great!! That is a good deal. Do keep us posted on your thoughts when you get some time on it.