Jump to content

The new Flextail


bbruzzese
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Baller

@OB1 I was wondering the same thing, I guess it still flexes more torsionally than with out the cuts and although this might be good, the ski is advertised for its lateral flex which should enhance ski's turning ability.

So why tapping all six sims?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 218
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Baller
@skialaex and @ozski -its possible that the flextail allows a flexing or twisting action in more than one plane and that @OB1 really likes the flex in one plane but not so much the other. also the shape of the ski is new having been developed by nick parsons and maybe just the shape alone is the *real* secret to the ski.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

Ok. Take it for what it's worth from a 22 off skier.

I've had the flextail for a month and have skied really good and really bad on it.

It has been very inconsistent for me.

I have 3 sets in a nano 1ft now and I know for sure I'm keeping it and the flextail is going back on Monday.

This thing is legit. I have yet to ski on good water but I have a personal best of 4 at 28 off today in a 15 mph head wind.

The turns are so much smoother than the normal flextail.

I was worried about getting wide on the n1ft because of what I've heard about the N1. This was not the case. Even into the wind I was plenty wide.

 

I'm on the 66.75.

It came at 6.830 tips 2.499 .705

It was sluggish on the onside and turned hard on the off.

Trent told me to go to 6.825 and move forward to .711. Still at 2.499

That was money. Or T$.

I'm really impressed.

I was on an xtm before and I liked it better than the flextail but the n1ft has the xtm beat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

@Ed_Johnson I am 6'2" 210

The FT is the narrowest of the 3.

Ft 6.910

Xtm 6.950

N1ft 6.930

All measured at front insert.

The FT by far gets wider and is significantly faster than the other two.

The ft tends to turn more abruptly and the n1ft carves a tight but smoother turn.

The n1ft rides so deep in the water and is so stable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I loved being wide but I could not get the ski to turn consistently.

I never tried the shims.

I also felt out of control on the ft. I rode so high on the water that I felt like I had no control.

And I was 2.512 deep at one point on the ft

 

On the n1ft I feel sucked to the water but it still generates speed and width and then shuts down fast.

Also. I feel like I skied horrible today and still ran a PB.

I had to be perfect on the ft or it punished me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I just remeasured. My 67.75 ft and the 66.75 n1ft

The n1ft is widet than the ft from mid front boot forward

 

The ft is wider than the n1ft from between boots back to the tail.

@Ed_Johnson I'm not sure what difference in width makes.

My under standing on how high a ski rides on the water depends on the bevels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...