Denali C75 Review

[Than_Bogan]

Unexpectedly, I didn't ski for two weeks, but then I got my 5th set on my S c-75 last night. Ran -35 again. Keep in mind I hadn't done that a single time this season before this ski. For bonus points, I did it with substantial sun glare.

[B_S]

I guess it IS a polarizing ski! :D

[Ed_Johnson]

@VONMAN ... In answer to your question, still searching. The only thing I have settled on is front boot at 29 1/4, and the S-Wing causes to much Drag, even at 5 degrees, compared to smaller flat wings.

 

I've had the ski where it will really turn on a dime and accelerate away, but slow cross course...I've also tuned it to be fast cross course, but not slow down, and had to force the turn. So now it's zeroing in on getting it to do both. Fast and Turn.

 

Weather hasn't co-operated at all. All set up to try some short/shallow settings, but wind knocked out today and probably tomorrow. Hope by the end of next week will have final settings, really close. I went through a similar experience with the NRG, and got it to really rock. This ski has so much untapped potential, I can feel it.

 

 

 

[Highland_MI_Skier]

@Ed_Johnson .....curious how you find the C75 compared to the NRG. I have ridden the NRG for 2 years. This year the ski seems have too much drag. The C75 has caught my attention as I consider a new ski for next season. Curious how you would compare the 2.

[Ed_Johnson]

I found the C75 and NRG to be quite similar. They are both very forgiving skis. While both will reward you with a FWD Stacked position, they will not punish you if your neutral or back. Also, both are not very fast cross course, but my no means slow. They also both have the greatest offside turns ever. You simply tune both for your onside turn, I think the offside would be great, even if you put the fin on backwards.

 

The plus for the C75 is I believe to have a slight advantage as a better short line ski. Both skis can turn sharp, but the C75 can accelerate quicker off the apex.

 

Note that I am comparing the NRG with the CG Fin and Whisper Fin installed. The Denali will blow away the NRG with a stock fin. It was remarkable to me how much the CG and WF improved the NRG. Also, I spent over 3 months testing and improving the NRG, while I only have 7 sets on the C75 at this point, and there is a lot of tuning room for improvement.

 

 

 

[Cent]

Ed Johnson if you were looking to buy a fin for the NRG at 32 off do you have a recommendation between the CG and the Whisper Fin. Thanks.

[Ed_Johnson]

@Cent... That's a hard call. Most skiers are in favor of the CG because it simply does everything better. With the WF, some Love it and others not so much. It is great for a very experienced skier who really can tune a ski well. You need to be aggressive, and it will reward you.

 

Personally, the CG overall has the widest tuning range. There are almost no bad settings, and probably easier to find your sweet spot.

 

However, for balls out performance at shortline, the WF is slightly faster and can turn harder at speed. Just watch Whitney on it at 39 this year.

 

Without question, both these fins blow away a stock fin, so you can't go wrong with either one. How they transformed my NRG was simply amazing.

 

 

[jayski]

Been on a large for about 6 practice sets and 8 tourney sets, feel there is good potential with the ski, only issue I woudl like to resolve is the heavier tail slide and sometimes release of tail on my offiside. I realize technique is a factor but it becomes more inherent as the line gets shorter. @AdamCord @adamhcaldwell

 

"Large" ski

185-190lb

6'1"

mid 38 avg

Reflex supershell 4 front w/R style rear

28.5" front

12" spacing between ankle bones

1.05" DFT

2.52" Depth

6.804 Length

8 deg S wing

[Horton]

go to 2.53 or 2.535

[Horton]

than go back . 005 or . 007.

 

ignore @AdamCord if he tells you do both at once or five other things at once

 

:-)

[Than_Bogan]

I really should let @AdamCord answer this, but I've had a similar issue with similar settings, and what I've been finding is that each move backwards is better. I didn't actually try these in this order, but in total I've been at 1.05, 1.04, 1.03, and 1.025, and each move backward has improved the offside stability without any noticeable loss. For my next set, I am likely to go to 1.01. Of course eventually this will be for the worse, and I probably will try what @Horton said as well. A little more depth might be advisable for -38 (which apparently I am working on again...)

[AdamCord]

Yep, back and deeper is the way to go to fix that @jayski.

[rico]

It is amazing how the ski keeps going after a bad start. Tournament today and got a terrible one but as I was expecting to be done at 2, the ski turned and accelerated off the buoy. Hummm went to 3 and same thing, maybe I can get a piece of 4 and ski turned again. I was too late to go around 5 but the ski is incredible.

 

I then witness @horton screw up is one ball at 38 and somehow run it

[jayski]

Thank you @Horton @Than_Bogan @AdamCord

[Milford]

@jayski I experienced the same problem and am currently sitting at 1.01 and 2.550. That fixed it. Don't be afraid to go deeper. I found that this fin takes bigger movements than what I was used to with a traditional fin.

[Than_Bogan]

@Milford Are those settings for -39? If you topped out at -38 do you think you'd still want that much fin? I liked 1.01/2.52 today (in poor conditions so a little hard to judge) and definitely agree big moves are fine, so I could consider a jump to your numbers.

[Milford]

@Than_Bogan yes tuning to run -39 and 41. I am not noticing much if any downside to going deeper. Tried 2.52, 2.53, 2.54 and 2.55. 2.55 eliminated my offside tail release so that is where I am currently at. I would definitely encourage you to give deeper a try. 2.53 was fine at -38, but wasn’t holding at -39. Cord said he’s running as deep as 2.58 at 36 mph.

[rico]

Ran my first ever tournament 38 today after 4 weeks on the ski.

[Wish]

@rico congratulations.. That's awesome!! ??

[Horton]

@rico was it a 5 ball course?

[Than_Bogan]

@Horton That is funny, but still: boooo.

 

@Rico If ever we need a reaction that goes beyond Awesome, it's for running that damn purple line!!! HUGE CONGRATULATIONS!

[ALPJr]

Sure seems like this ski is inspiring confidence and is flat out good.

[paul413ski]

@rico great skiing @horton must have been a five ball with exit gates :D

[Milford]

The Denali C-75 is such a departure from traditional ski design I had to try it and I sure am glad I did. The ski just keeps getting better the more time I spend on it. I took last year off and had my 3rd back surgery in August 2018, so started 2019 off slower than normal. As I got stronger and more confident, I started going for it, but was not skiing as well as I had hoped on my old ski. I started trying different skis, but nothing was getting me excited or giving me any extra buoys. I was running 38 off 10% of the time and was getting frustrated. I decided to pull the trigger and ordered a large C-75 and instantly knew this was my new ski. First ride, tied my 2019 PB with 3@39. 2 weeks later, skied a 3 round tournament and ran 38 off all 3 rounds set a new 2019 PB of 4@39. I went from running 38 off 10% of the time to not missing it for 25 sets. I entered the BOS Cash Prize last weekend and did miss my 38 both sets on Saturday (mentally distracted), but managed to run in all 3 rounds on Sunday to place 4th and take home some cash. I got to meet @AdamCord and pick his brain on ski design and was so impressed with how Denali goes about testing, building molds, shape, theory, etc. When I got paired to ski against Adam in second round of H2H, I pretty much figured I was done, but Adam came into the 3 ball at 38 so early that he didn't know what to do with all the space and ended up loading the tip out of the 3 ball and when out the front.

 

This ski has literally given me 6 buoys. There were 4 skiers skiing on them at the BOS cash prize and another 2 down in AZ last weekend. I know of 3 more people that have ordered them and are waiting to receive. If your looking for a ski that challenges the status quo and in my opinion is the first ski to change the traditional design that has been around for 30+ years, give this thing a shot.

 

 

[Wish]

@Milford first of all WOW....second congratulations!!! That's amazing progress.

[Golfguy]

Three in Az last weekend. Watching the skiers from the judges tower, the ski was rock solid in every stage of the pull/turn. Smooth as butter. I can't wait to ski mine again tomorrow. Thanks Jeff for your glowing review, you are spot on.

[o2bnMaine]

I just tried the c75 (small).

 

In a prior life, I've muscled it to get a PB at 3 buoys at 35-off/36mph. I'm a 34mph skier now and haven't spent enough time working back into shortline. That's going to change, though. I've tried a number of skis. None seemed to fit or seemed markedly better than my V-Type R. I tried the c75 (small) this past weekend at Trophy Lakes. Adam set it up for me. On his second boot placement he nailed it. It felt great.

 

I managed to get a PB (for 34mph) of 1.5 @ 32-off. 1-ball felt so comfortable I lost concentration at 2-ball and let go of the handle. The ski came around great on my off-side. Based on how 1-ball felt, I should have gotten around all 6. Even with over a month of only free skiing (no course time at all since mid-August) I was feeling comfortable enough on the c75 to keep pushing beyond 28. It just felt predictable.

 

I've been skiing on HO since the 90's, but I will be ordering a c75 soon.

 

Adam commented on how the c75 stayed down in the water for me compared to the V-Type R I usually ride. The HO bounced over the wakes (at 22-off). The c75 stayed settled and held the edge better.

[rockdog]

@o2bnMaine I think a lot of skis bounce over at 22 off to be fair. Nevertheless the ski sounds like it's worked for you so another review of it once you buy one one would be good to read as you're about my level.

[Adam Caldwell]

@rockdog - when a bounce at the wakes causes the ski to still be almost porpoising at the buoy line as it rolls over....then something is not right with the setup especially when its still happening as the rope gets shorter.

 

Unfortunately so many people take experiences like that and chalk it up to 'I just have to work on my technique and get better", when the reality is that its an issue with the overall setup.

 

@o2bnMaine is a very strong skier. As strong and as technical as any skier i have see run into mid 38 on the right equipment. Sounds like Lucky saw this in him too and why he recommended he start trying out new gear out.

[jayski]

@AdamCord @adamhcaldwell what is the actual size difference between the large and medium? and not a percentage, interested in width at the usual flex measurement points and at the end of tail

[Adam Caldwell]

Sometimes a pictures is worth a thousand words.

 

 

[jayski]

@adamhcaldwell well that's pretty much useless in determining whether the large I currently have is the correct ski for me or the medium would be a better choice. Coming from a guy that probably does or has found value in numbers and basing decisions on them I would of expected a more. My bad I guess...guess I just assume you guys designed the medium and small based on a guess of relevant width changes cause "it looked about right" ...some of us don't go for pictures and labels of small, med, large, soft, stiff, 67, 66, 68...good job on keeping my visa in my pocket for that Medium...

[Skierx]

I LOVE my medium @ 178 pounds .

[Ed_Johnson]

@jayski...The weight range for the sizes seems to be pretty accurate. I am guessing there is about a 1/8th difference in width between sizes. My Large works great for me at 6'4" and 220lbs. I even tried a 240lb skier on it, with no problems at all.

 

 

[AdamCord]

@jayski I believe that was meant to be a joke since the skis all look about the same. Size difference is .125”. We don’t scale, we actually add that width down the center of the ski in the CAD. That makes it so that every size is exactly the same (bevels, rocker, tunnel, etc), except for the added surface area.

[Adam Caldwell]

@jayski - simply a joke. Personally I didn't want to share what Cord just shared publicly and was hoping you would recognize that and might ask your question privately.

 

[Drago]

@jayski touchy. arent you a d3 rep?

[Than_Bogan]

@adamhcaldwell Wow, I literally got all of that out of your post. Wonder if I should be alarmed that I am now fluent in Caldwell Pictorial Sarcasm?

[jayski]

@AdamCord thank you for the insight, understanding, and the reply, which brings me to more questions for my understanding which I will reach out in other routes. You have been most helpful on all other occasions I have dealt with you, thank you again

 

@adamhcaldwell if I was an insider or have seen all sizes together I may understand the small differences in size and not have had to ask the question, in regards to my question being privately sent, how is anyone to know what your company wishes to divulge or not divulge publicly? You could of easily sent me a PM or even stated "we wish not to publicly share that type of information, but what are your concerns or questions?"

 

@Ed_Johnson Being a guy that hovers between 185-195lbs the chart puts me in between, hence the thoughts of what size would be a better fit... and honestly weight charts are not an accurate tool to decide on ski sizing.

[jayski]

@Drago ya, my tolerance is low for BS answers, and in regards to the D3 rep part, you are correct, but that does not inhibit me from trying other skis, learning about the characteristics of the other brands to grow my understanding of them. Knowledge makes a person much better at relaying the attributes of whatever products they may represent..I also sell HO and Reflex skis and list of other product lines...and honestly I am just a amateur unpaid skier, if a HO, reflex, D3, Goode, Denali gets my ass through 38 on a regular basis I am riding it, regardless of what I sell...Maybe @AdamCord and @adamhcaldwell and I can come to some agreement and have Cottonwood as the Denali Demo center for the SC region next year :D

[Skierx]

Wow! Having a sense of humor sure makes life more enjoyable. Having an open mind to drop the past knowledge that has kept most of us in a rut may help understand the Grand Unified Theory of slalom together. Little more flexible little less rigid could help get you past -38 off.

[dvskier]

Sounds like a pretty harsh response @jayski after all Adam Caldwell has done a lot for the sport and continues to do so. Why badger him for the intimate details of his ski design? Do you think any other business that has spent a tremendous amount of time developing a revolutionary new product is going to reveal all their secrets to you?

[jayski]

@dvskier first off I didn't "badger" it was ONE question NOT ALL the "secrets" lol and he could of easily said I wish not to disclose...secondly anyone alone or with fellow skiers with access to more than one size of ski size could easily garner the width measurements and share on line...Width of the skis is FAR from a secretive revolutionary detail. Maybe if I asked for the mathematical details, measurements and angles of the tunnel design...then for sure I would be pushing the envelope into 'secretive revolutionary design detail"...lastly I am sure Mr. Caldwell has done a lot in the ski world and so have many others, no one is passing judgment on that, but that doesn't give anyone a hall pass, if it does I would like mine please lol and really, the day someone calls me out or busts my a$$ about something and I get offended is the day I get indoctrinated into team snowflake...

[Than_Bogan]

@jayski I think we -- or at least I -- are just making fun of you for not laughing along with the joke. If you didn't find it funny, then so be it. But it wasn't a "BS answer" -- it was just humor. Attacking Adam when he was trying to entertain seems unnecessary.

[Wish]

"Coming from a guy that probably does or has found value in numbers and basing decisions on them I would of expected a more" "....you guys designed the medium and small based on a guess of relevant width changes"

 

"Maybe if I asked for the mathematical details..."

 

@jayski wouldn't that be mathematical details or measurements you were expecting?

 

Love the team snowflake comment ??

 

Sad to say I got Caldwells joke as well. It's a sickness he is spreading.

[Adam Caldwell]

@jayski,

 

Our Smallest size measures wider under the back foot then a several of the top manufacturers larger 68" skis. Our tunnel design is also completely different. Analyzing the ski's width figures alone might be very misleading if comparing a c-75 to something else. BUT....Since you now have the sizing offset you you can go measure and calculate any profile dimension you wish to.

 

If you just wanted to try out a Medium for shits and grins, just shot us an email and we can easily make that happen.

[S1Pitts]

@jayski I total understand your dilemma as I am virtually a carbon copy for weight, performance level,etc. and have been struggling to decipher posts / videos to determine which size of ski to order. Many have posted that the skis will carry more weight than they are rated for but few posts on what happens if you are at the low or even under weight for the size.

 

Back on page 5 Adam Cord posted

"there’s not really a market for 36mph skis unfortunately. That being said, I’m skiing the best of my life on the c75 at 36, I just have to drop down to the smaller size. We’re thinking about making an XS for 36 since I’m 180 riding the small at that speed. Anyone much smaller may find the small to be too big. Off season project."

 

With all the skis being 65 " long, same bevels,etc and it has been said that the fin settings follow size to size - so one can only assume the turns are virtually the same - this clouds things a bit. So what characteristics change to make the ski "too big" and can this come into play @ 34mph?

[Adam Caldwell]

@S1Pitts,

 

The fin settings between 34 and 36mph are NOT the same. What works best at 34 does not work best at 36 - at least for me. But, our baseline settings are a great start point on all sizes at a given speed. However, that does not stop us from tweaking things in as best we can for individual style/bindings/ability/etc.

 

At 5'9 170lbs i ride the Medium at 34 primarily and the Small at 36.

 

We consult with every customer on matching up ski size, ability and weight, and further, work with them as much as we possibly can to further dial in our baseline settings (which, we continue to find new zones and ranges as time passes that work unbelievable well for people).

 

We have zero intention of tweaking the ski design from where it is. We talk about it a lot, and neither @AdamCord or I know how to make it any better at this point. We plan to stick with this shape for a while, and may refine a version of it specifically for 36mph, and play with fin theory to see if we cant go deeper into 43.

 

[Bruce_Butterfield]

@adamhcaldwell ” We have zero intention of tweaking the ski design from where it is.“

 

I’ll believe that for maybe the next 5 minutes :p

[bhs]

@Bruce_Butterfield, by far the funniest comment all day!