Dave Goode rocks

[eleeski]

We all know about his great slalom skis and skiing (I boat judged MM slalom at Imperial Saturday and every skier in the division, including Dave, rode a Goode). But I also judged his trick ride. OK, he's a long way from MM tricks. He's right there with the beginning college kids. But he's just starting so that's OK.

 

The magic is in his trick ski design. I built a huge ski a few years back. I didn't get it to work. Goodman is building a giant ski that works for some college skiers (but is too long for college nationals?). Kirk rode one but didn't ask me for a bigger ski. Dave showed up with a severely modified wakeboard - mounted trick style. I was pretty skeptical. More so when he asked for 12.8 mph. But once he started skiing, I was convinced. He's just starting to trick so he has some common problems. Usually those errors punish you with a hard edge catch fall. His ski resisted those tendencies. A couple minutes of coaching and he hit his first reverse O! Scored it in the tournament the next day.

 

He's doing something right. The big ski, the bottom design, the binding setup and the tuning made the ski work for him. The most creative part was going so slowly. It made the falls soft and slow. I'm impressed and excited to watch his progress.

 

Soon a Goode trick for beginners?

 

Eric

[Ed_Johnson]

Video or Photos ???

[Sethro]

Being a big guy, I'd like to hear more about this big trick ski. I'd like to purchase a new ski, but I'm not sold on the 44" Aira or 43.5" Graviton being big enough for 6'5" 220ish.

[Chef23]

@Sethro I have a 45" D3 XT that I skied on at 240 lbs and it worked great. I just looked at their website and they still make the HC LTD rubber edge ski in a 45.

[Bruce_Butterfield]

Interesting idea. I was a trick skier once upon a time - in the neighborhood of 3000pts at 180 lbs on a 43", but retired around 1990. About 10 yrs ago, I got a wild hair and picked up a 45" D3 (now about 190lbs) which was a big improvement over the old 43, but still alot of work. After riding it about twice a year, I sold it last year.

 

I heard rumors of people experimenting with big trick skis and did some quick math - to get the same surface area to weight ratio as a 110lb person on a 42", I would need a 52" ski with the same aspect ratio. No wonder tricks are for kids!

 

So, another wild hair ..... I have a 20 year old wakeboard that gets used once a year for parties and such... also happen to have a spare reflex and more than enough binding parts to make a toe plate, a little time in the shop and presto - an f'ing ginormous trick ski! 56" long and 16" wide.

 

Very easy to ride and do some basic tricks, but didn't track or edge worth crap. Definitely on the "too big" side. Good experiment, but one set was enough.

 

But I must be getting senile in my old age. I just ordered a $100, 52" board and will take some sharp implements and fiberglass to it over the winter. Hopefully it will turn out to be more than a one set experiment.

[eleeski]

@Bruce_Butterfield keep us posted.

 

Note that Dave had filled in all his grooves and added some vortex generator tape to reduce the drag for the low speed he wants. He did take a couple falls that might have hurt at a faster speed but were very low energy at the low speed. For him, the big ski was just to keep from getting beat up while learning the basics.

 

While you might need a 52 to match a kid's pressure, you could also speed up a bit. The energy increases with the square of the speed so it doesn't take much. When I started, 16mph was the default speed. Almost nobody goes that slow now. Speed up and lengthen the rope and your 3000 points might be in range again.

 

Ski design is also a huge factor. I am skiing a 45 inch fairly traditional ski. But it is pretty high drag and needs over 18mph to work. I was playing around with a barely 42" ski that was a bit unconventional but worked quite well years ago (probably ran more points than my current ski has). It was much lower drag and I had to slow down a lot despite the shorter length.

 

Note that old factory skis were typically narrower so you aren't likely to find old gems. Keep an eye on Goode and Goodman, and trust the big Quantum and D3 proven big guy skis. Fun stuff is happening with trick designs.

 

Eric

[dchristman]

For Sale: 54.5" UltraLite "Biggie" custom trick ski, includes ski sock and work stand. Contoured tip makes edging to the wake for flips automatic! Getting the same model in a different size, I need a smaller one. I should have gotten the 52". Make an offer.

 

 

 

[mbabiash]

How’s the trick ski project coming. Thinking of doing something similar @Bruce_Butterfield

[mbabiash]

@eleeski So I’ve started building a trick ski out of an old wakeboard too. I’ve cut the basic shape out. It’s 48 in by 15 at its widest.

I’m going to glass the edges but my question is should there be a small rocker width wise too? Preventing edges from grabbing?

[eleeski]

There are so many variables. One of the best skis I built was slightly concave underfoot and convex at the ends. It tracked wonderfully (concave underfoot) and didn't catch edges (convex tip and tail). But that was really hard to find the right balance. I'm pretty flat now.

 

Resistance to edge catching is significantly affected by the shape of the edge. A blunt edge will chatter before it catches. A knife edge will be much smoother but can dive quickly resulting in a hard edge catch. My skis are blunt underfoot and knife edge at the ends.

 

Edge finish is important. A sharp 1mm wide 45 bevel lifts the edge. A rounded edge makes it ride deeper to track better but catch more. Custom tuning works! Build in enough material to sand on that bottom edge.

 

Overall rocker also matters. Flatter skis catch a bit more but edge better - to a point. And other factors overshadow this.

 

Edge profile matters. Straight edges track best but might catch more. The transition to the tip is more important (squared, round or elliptical - I've made all work). Keep a reasonably long straight no matter what so you can track. Wakeboard foot placement gives a lot more edge authority so their edges curve too much for a trick mount.

 

As you can see, there are tons of variables. Add the size unknown and you have a project ahead. But it can be quite fun. Good stories from the failures. Quite rewarding with the successes. Enjoy the build.

 

Eric

[dchristman]

Bump.

It's spring in the south... how are those big skis working? I sold mine

[Bruce_Butterfield]

@dchristman I hope you made a profit! Mine is slowly working its way up toward the top of my project list, but will be a little while yet. Lake maintenance, kids skiing, cold water, home projects........ all that other crap that gets in the way of tinkering......

[Bruce_Butterfield]

Well I finally got the tools out this weekend and took just over an inch off each side to get the sides straight. Rounded the corners and flattened the bottom a little. Overall I think the shape and edges will turn out well, but it does have more rocker than I would like.

 

Next is fiberglassing the the cuts to cover up the exposed foam and file/sand to finish.

 

[eleeski]

@Bruce_Butterfield Very cool! Let us know how it skis.

 

Eric

[dchristman]

@Bruce_Butterfield Be sure to video the maiden runs on your new iBoard - I'm especially looking forward to seeing your toe pass with it!

[Bruce_Butterfield]

@dchristman fat chance on the video. I may be old, but I’m not an old fool. :D

[Bruce_Butterfield]

Well I have 2 sets on the BF trick ski and had some positive results, but unfortunately it fell short overall.

 

The good: surface area was very good. Easy to ride and able to trick at 17.5mph vs well over 19 on a 45”. It tracked reasonably well. The irregularities on the bottom didn’t seem to be a problem. Stable and easy to ride.

 

The bad: the basic board has significantly more rocker than a normal trick ski. I was worried that this would make turns spongy and harder to get air - which it did, but not really that bad. The showstopper is that when the ski gets sideways there isn’t enough lift and the middle of the board sits deeper and BANG the edge catches. I caught 2 nasty edges on a simple back to front and a line back. That was enough for me.

 

I think the conclusion of this little experiment is that a trick ski in the 50-52” range with the same proportions, shape and rocker as a quantum or D3 would be excellent for us heavier (and older) skiers who want to dabble in tricks.

 

[mbabiash]

@Bruce_Butterfield

Did you put a small 45 degree bevel on the edge or is it sharp.

I’m done building mine too but haven’t ridden it yet.

@eleeski told me to put a bevel on the edge of the ski 1mm wide and at 45 degrees.

Supposed to keep edge from catching.

 

[BraceMaker]

Is there enough thickness in the middle of the board to grind some of the crown out of the center rocker?

[Bruce_Butterfield]

Yes, the bevel on the sides is probably 5-10mm at a 45 deg angle. The board is relatively thick, but to get the rocker I want would probably take 2" out of the bottom. Obviously that won't work. Once I looked in person at some other wakeboards, there are others that would have been a much better starting point.

 

Since this was a "wild hair" experiment, my selection criteria was whatever 52ish wakeboard I could find on the internet for $100. If I had looked in person I would not have started with this board.

[BraceMaker]

This is intriguing because I have a very old long NIB obrien that I think minus tip and tail would be pretty flat in the middle.