Long shot ... 66 inch 2002 Iconn Sonic C-6 factory numbers , Anyone ?

[Glydon]

So I got this old ski for next to nothing the only problem is I bought it totally blank and have no idea what the set-up should be. I know how helpful and knowledgeable ballers are , any input from someone that had/has one would be great , looking for DFT , Fin depth and length , and wing angle or if I even should use it. Thanks.

[DW]

My better half has a C-6 but it is a 63" version. Are those numbers of any value to you, they are what I set up for her, not necessarily what it came with. Good purchase, she loves that ski & I tried it and thought is was pretty good.

[Glydon]

@DW ... likely not comparable with the 66 but appreciate any and everything I can get.

[Drago]

@glydon I have 2 in my basement. I'll get the #'s for you tomorrow.

[Glydon]

@Drago ... thanks man , this is AWESOME news!

 

[JohnN]

Have a 66 C-6, may be a 2001 (the one with the flames), it was set at 2.37, 6.90, .80. If I remember correctly this was a little shorter, shallower and further back than stock, and I had my bindings all the way back. Mostly skied it in fairly cool water. Great ski, great tracking through the wakes (very defined bevels), stable with a carve-y feel to it. Pretty heavy compared to the newer skis I had to move to get to it.

[ForrestGump]

I had a buddy who had a Sonic. The original fin settings were LONG and shallow and way forward. Something like 2.400 deep, 6.990 long, and .880 dft. In the end, he used more D3 like numbers of 2.496, 6.890, .740dft.

[Glydon]

@JohnN @ShaneH ... thanks very very much. I knew you guys would come through. I do have the one with the flames and now at least I have something to go forward with.

[Drago]

ok, @Glydon, here you go: I actually find this hard to believe, but I was skiing Open at the time, and my skis were set up by Erik Kosney, the rep., he was running 39 on the same ski. (not THE same ski, but....).937, 2.392, 6.913. bindings at 29 1/4. this is for a 68, so for a 66, go back to 28 1/4 for bindings, and maybe take out .01 in length, and .01 in DFT [.927, 2.392, 6.903]. Looking at the ski and these numbers, I guess it had trouble turning ;/ my ski was filed at the tail and bottom rail up to the middle of the front foot, where it's white in the photo's, if I actually attached the photos....Good luck and BE CAREFUL, feel it out and adjust as necessary with the knowledge we have gained in 15 years.

[Drago]

@Glydon, got pic's. had to add dot jpg

[Glydon]

@Drago thanks for that , yeah I have a pic from waterski magazine of Erik on this ski ... and that is my issue getting it to turn. I appreciate the numbers and photos. I have 300% more information than I had a week ago. Thanks to yourself , @JohnN and @ShaneH .

[skosney]

Funny how times have changed. Wayne Hanzel used to bring a few skis up to the lake to test and neither of us had calipers so we use to use a tape measure and start with the settings of a 7" length, 2.5" depth and we'd measure the DFT from the front of the fin at 8". The skis usually worked pretty well with only minor tweaking required. We were mostly testing 66's and I want to say stock binding placement was 28 1/2 but that's not as clear because we would just put them in center position of the Iconn binding. We also used to make multiple changes between sets or half sets because we were either short on daylight or stamina to make one change at a time and, of course, Pat was looking for feedback ASAP. Now a days I have a hard time breathing on my ski without taking a calibrated measurement. My how times have changed.