Ski Suggestion?

[giantjoe]

 

Hi! I've been off the site for a while, but this summer I got very into skiing again. Above is a sample of my skiing (2000 Mastercraft X-5 @ 34mph 15' off using a Radar P-6). Below is a history lesson...

 

I've been skiing for about 10 years. When I started, I was 6'6" and about 230-235. Started with a 69" HO CFR Charger (circa2010). I liked the ski for as much as I knew, but wanted to learn the course. @Chris Rossi suggested I use a P-6 at low speed to learn the course, so I got one and used it. In fact, I used it exclusively and never touched the Charger again. Until this year... I lost 30ish pounds, and my strength has increased a bunch.

 

I feel that the P-6 is a nice feeling ski, but crossing the wake is a bounce-fest. The Charger seems to me to cut too sharply. It feels like it wants to make j-turns, while I would prefer a s-type turn. I only open water ski as the lake will not permit a course, but I do like to try to stitch 7 turns together in rapid succession. I think I'll be keeping the weight off, so it makes sense that I'd like a shorter ski as well as a thinner profile. I am open to all thoughts and suggestions (and of course critique of my video).

 

I'm under the impression right now, that RADARs allow you to choose your turn radius depending on your lean angle, while other skis have their set radius that you have to adapt to.

 

thanks in advance

[giantjoe]

Oh, the P-6 is a 71".

[escmanaze]

Well that's the best part about the Radar product offering. In theory, you can just move right up the line and have each ski feel familiar, but just a little more aggressive than the last one.

 

If you wanted to go just one step up you could go to a Union. But if you're going to keep skiing at 34 mph, it would probably be better to do the next step after that, which would be a senate.

 

It might be wise though to keep that P-6 around. If you ever do go get into a course, you'll need to drop the speed significantly when you're first learning it, and that P-6 will have the surface area needed to stay on top of the water at those slower speeds.

 

Have you tried shorter ropes? 22,28, or even 32 off? Just for fun experimentation you ought to give it a try as you might find some things you like better about it when you are out shredding freeskiing. You might find crossing the wakes to be less of a "bounce-fest" at one of those rope lengths. Really, for free-skiing, it's just whatever is the most fun for you - worthy trying out a few other things a few times.

 

I'm not sure exactly what you're referring to with choosing the radius vs. turn angle vs. having a set radius. Sorry, can't help you there.

[Ski_Dad]

Just trying to bump your thread a little. I'm just a intermediate skier myself but it seems that you are hitting the wake with the ski pretty flat and also have too much weight on your back leg - especially on your offside.

 

I think a 69" ski would would be more appropriate size and ride lower in the water - not sure if others would recommend the Union or Senate at your level ?

 

I also think you should consider trying different line lengths or slowing the boat down to 30 or 32 to find a sweet spot behind your boat.

 

 

[BraceMaker]

The radius concept I think sounds like talk from downhill ski side cuts where the radius very much impacts the natural turn.

 

Slalom ski turn radius can essentially be tuned by binding location and fin settings regardless of brand but definitely some designers discuss the characteristics of the turns.

 

I think what you might be running into is a combination of set up location of bindings and such on ski and body position.

[DangerBoy]

@giantjoe There's a 69 HO Carbon Omni BWF cheap on eBay right now.

 

https://ebay.com/itm/1-HO-Carbon-Omni-Water-ski-69BWF/401858645057

 

That would be an excellent choice for you, depending on what you can get it for.