Nano One vs the Nano OneXT

[Horton]

In a few weeks I will write the official ski review for the Nano OneXT. In my reviews I do not compare skis to other skis. I will sort of bend the rules today and talk a little about the Nano One vs the Nano OneXT.

 

The dimensional differences between the two skis is the shape of the bevels and the rocker pattern. I think the XT bevels are sharper but the same radius (if that is possible?). As for the rocker I have no idea what the difference is but it is not the same.

 

I found the original Nano One a bit befuddling. I consistently ran more balls on that ski than any other ski but I also found that I struggled to be smooth. That ski is a bit of work and I never really felt like I made space in front of the ball. My scores were above my average but my routine of working on technique was maddening. On that ski you just sort of go for it.

 

Fast forward to the XT. I am making a lot of space and not working very hard at all. In fact I find the ski really works best when I try to dial my intensity down. There is no question that the ski gets plenty wide. Every once in a while I take the handle outside the ball line on my off side at 35 off. That is just crazy.

 

I do not want to really comment much on the how it turns vs the Nano One yet. The original Nano One turns on a dime not matter what the skier does. So far the XT turns good but I was talking to Parsons last night and he thinks my fin is too deep so we think we are going to make it even better. The details will get ironed out for the final review. I will publish fin settings only when I think I have the best ones for me.

 

As it is still only May and I have been distracted a bit I have not tried many 38s yet so I do not have any high score data yet.

 

[GOODESkier]

I guess I am the anomaly, cause I moved to the longer 66.75 XT from a 66 XT over the winter, and almost immediately ( 6 sets into this year) ran my second ever 38. Basically a PB in 44 degree water in a dry suite! Almost ran another one this past weekend.... should have could have.... you know the story. I thought I was running it, then I tried too hard. Head game error and the full pass fell a little short of success.

 

Anyway, I am with @Horton‌ , however I don't know why? I can be wider and earlier than I even want to be at 35 and 38. It just seems to ski better the lighter and easier you are on it. I think the new flex and rocker numbers of the 66.75 have made it really work for a taller guy that tends to maybe push the ski a little too hard on the off side sometimes.

 

Since I am not a ski reviewer, I can only testify that it works better for me than the numbers on the website might suggest. I am 180 lbs. and 6'3"

[Chuck_Dickey]

@GOODESkier‌

I suspect it's due to your height. I'm 5'-8" and the bigger skis didn't work for me. I was 180 lbs, now 170 and am on the 65.25.

 

The bigger ones just didn't turn for me.

[Texas6]

@Horton, the Goode skis should all test better if you don't give them to the airline first

[Horton]

@Texas6‌ please do not talk about the death on my original Nano! I still cry myself to sleep over that ski.

 

United came through in the end.

[Than_Bogan]

Wait, United came through in the end? I thought we all found an official policy that they basically don't take one ounce of responsibility for skis, including intentional destruction.

 

What did they do and under what level of duress? (Feel free to move to separate thread if appropriate.)

[Horton]

@Than_Bogan‌ I found a Baller on the inside...

[GregDavis]

I have em both, Nano One and Nano One XT. Love both skis, When I have a bad set, I get the other ski out. I think switching skis makes me focus more. Usually first several passes on either Nano One or the XT, are very good, after a few sets, I think I just go out and go through the motions, without focusing.

[Than_Bogan]

@GregDavis It never fails to amaze me how I figure out how to reintroduce all my problems to a ski that solved them for me!

[GregDavis]

Well said