Jump to content

help with CG fin


Bill22
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Baller

I did not post this in the CG fin discussion because I did not want to clutter up the other CG fin discussion. I received my CG fin early in the season then spent the season trying 3 different skis, now I am back on my good Ol’ Vapor.

 

Here we go; I have two free-ski rides on my ski with a CG fin (CG set to same as standard fin w/ DFT -.030 of .720). Two minor issues a) my old binding blew out and I am trying a T-factor for the first time b) I am at the low end of weight range on this ski and never got it dialed in just right.

 

First ride with the T-factor: 32mph open water no buoys, front boot is set 1/8” back (29 1/4) just to make sure no crazy OTF’s. I could not get the ski to turn either side, felt like I could not get the front of ski in the water.

 

The obvious next move is front boot forward 1/8. Is there any other move I should make to get this ski to feel smaller? Bindings forward and wing 1 less degree to 8? I am asking because I will only get 1-2 sets before our club has a fun C tournament and I want to do my best.

 

Ski = ’16 Graphite Vapor 66” w/ RTP, 29 7/16” 6.935 2.455 0.750 9 deg, 40ish yo, 135 lb, 34mph max, average on this ski last year 2-3 @ 22off/34.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

After spending months on testing the Vapor Pro, EVO, and NRG, using the CG Fin, I came to the conclusion that the best way, was to set the ski of choice up with the stock fin, to the best that you can get it, then set the CG Fin up to those EXACT settings. I found no need to put the CG Fin back minus .030. You may do that if your just setting up the CG Fin without trying the stock fin first.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

One thing I recently discovered about the cg fin is you can run your bindings ahead ( one full inch in my case) and have a new completely feeling ski but in a great way. I then followed up by moving the fin forward until I was happy with the angle the ski was getting coming out of the turn. This was the result on the skis we tried this on with several different skiers agreeing that the skis now out performed their respective previous OEM fin / binding set up.

I am now convinced that switching to the cg fin also requires a some what radical forward binding move to get the full potential of the fin / ski combination.

I encourage all those trying the fin to go outside the norm of thinking for set up because there is potential when using this fin that is yet to be fully realized.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

@Than_Bogan

True that I am riding the C-65 but I am also riding my 15 Vapor as I find it is more tolerant of rougher water conditions so I flip back and forth.

I preferred the one inch and the three other skiers I ski test with stopped at 3/4 inch.

2016, 2015 vapor - 2017 Goode XT - 2016? Goode Rev 6 - 2016 HO VTR all reacted favorably to the binding being moved forward with the cg fin as compared to the standard fin.

Personally I did find that the first 1/4 inch jump forward did not feel that good but once I went another 1/4 inch things started to get better and by the third 1/4 inch the wow factor was kicking in. Again it did require an adjustment to the DFT to suit.

So that said as @Than_Bogan kindly pointed out - proceed with caution and take into account your particular riding style and ski as to how far forward you might be willing to safely go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

I don’t have a cg fin, but if you follow @AdamCord ‘s advice on moving dft back .03 and move your bindings forward 1”, Take Video.

Probably should have ice, a backboard and ankle brace, and maybe the ambulance co ready on speed dial, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

@Drago ummm... no, I'll keep my back in a straight line.

 

Back on task. I am thinking about going:

a) T-factor forward to old setting

b) DFT back to old setting per Ed

c) wing -1 to 8 per many comments in the other CG thread

 

Thoughts? Too many moves at once?

 

Plan B is to repair the old binding and try the T-factor again next spring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller
I have to agree with @Than_Bogan. I would spend 3-5 sets on the new binding before doing anything drastic. I made a binding change once and it took me 3 sets before I could even begin to turn the ski. By the 5th set I could run my opener and by the 7th my hardest full pass.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller_

@Bill22 : My suggestion is to drop to one variable at a time. Can you repair old binding, if yes do that and perform an A-B test on the T factor with ski in standard fin condition / set up that worked for you. At that point, you could then dial the T factor to your liking -or- do the CG fin A-B test with the original repaired binding and dial that setup in. If the original binding is non repairable, dial the T factor in with the original ski setup then proceed to the CG fin.

 

If you are determined to do multiple changes, create a small DOE matrix so you can post analyze the data and determine what works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Baller

The tone of this discussion just changed from, nothing is working to “let’s keep it right there a few more sets!”

 

Today was an awesome ski day and better than expected. I ran 22off four out of four times (34mph, ZO & straight boat path). I have never done that before.

 

In the past if I make -22 I always cut the line and bang my head on -28. Today on the 2nd set I gave -28 a shot then dropped back and ran two more -22’s.

 

I am not saying it’s the CG or the settings change or the T-factor. Maybe just the right combination of all three or two of them. I have been skiing better this year and running -22 even though I have been on four different skis.

 

I will keep you posted on the progress.

Thanks everyone for the input.

 

Settings update: DFT set same as old fin, wing -2 to 7deg, front boot same as first T-F ride (correction to OP, actually 1/16” back of old boot).

 

@Than_Bogan thanks!

 

@AdamCord thanks for sharing the CG with us.

 

@DW no work terms aloud... haha

 

@thager no clue what you are talking about. How many off topics are you going to give me in a discussion about my ski???

 

@S1Pitts very interesting results. Were all of those larger 68”-69” ski’s?

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...