Course Record Callaway Fin

[Stevie Boy]

Hi Fellow Ballers

Has anybody used or is using a Course Record Callaway Fin , does this fin have any benefits, it says that you can swap it out with your current fin and use the same numbers, which sounds appealing, if it has the ability to improve performance, obviously you have the Whisper Fin, Denali CG Fin, Speed Fin (Schnitz) which are different from most stock fins, but the Callaway is also cut away at the back.

Any thoughts ?

[Andre]

I'll be honest.Been following waterskiing for the last 30 years (yes,i started late!),reading almost everything about it that i could find.

 

Never heard of it.

[BraceMaker]

Have one in a box somewhere, Paul shipped it to me with some boots once.

 

I didn't notice much difference between a factory fin and it - although at the time I was on an undersized ski in normal water temps and Paul thought it was a good plan for people riding sort of "oversized" skis.

[Horton]

It seems like I need to make up some new fin shape and cash in.

[BraceMaker]

Maybe make them out of a different material? Like carbon or something.

[Stevie Boy]

@Andre look up fluid motion I think based in Canada.

[JAS]

@horton I’m working on a copper wrist bracelet, want in? Question, How can alternative fin shapes be somewhat immune to position, and adjustment of traditional fins be game changer if moved .005. Makes me think area might be part of explanation. Maybe new skis have been over finned?

[Horton]

@jas how about some underwear with "Genuine Silver" threads for better blood flow to your .... parts?

 

As for the adjustment question.... that is not really true. Some setups and or skis are more sensitive than others. The shape of the fin could in some ways could make it somewhat more or less sensitive but not drastically. Fin adjustments mostly changes the center of pressure and the drag of the fin.

 

In addition, Short Deep means a deeper riding tail and Long Shallow means a higher riding tails but shape likely does not play too much into that.

 

Shape matters but there is not magic shape that is immune to small adjustments.

[Stevie Boy]

I am no expert, but I always thought that the cutaway at the back of a fin, helped the ski turn as if it was shorter, have I got that totally wrong, put my hands up if I have it,s only what I was told once.

[Horton]

@Stevie Boy if you take a regular fin and you chop an inch off the back how is that different from running a fin that is an inch shorter from the front? Granted changing the shape of the trailing radius has some effect but you are just shifting the pressure center forwards and backwards or up and down on the fin surface.

[Stevie Boy]

So I ski with somebody who goes to ski with Chet Raley a lot, he took a hacksaw to their fin and cut about 1 1/2" off the back, years ago people were re shaping the back end of their fins, now Denali, Shnitz and Whisper, why would people feel the need to do that if they didn't think there was some gain ?

Or is it jus a head game.

[Horton]

I am not saying there may not be a gain with fin shape. What I am saying is that it is not a magic bullet. All of these fins are used by some very good skiers. Smaller shapes like the Whisper shape and the old Connelly shape and the old EP shape and other chop tail fins work great especially for lower level skiers.

 

Looking specifically at the FM fin I seriously doubt there was much high level testing.

[BraceMaker]

Adam cord covered the sensitivity aspect in the huge CG fin thread mostly in that by having the slot it dumps a huge volume of pressure along the ski. Which should maintain much of the features of the length and depth with out the added volume.

 

When FM released those fins it did so along with an Excel spreadsheet program for computation of fin settings/volume etc.

 

I think Paul may have spent more time thinking about it than he maybe needed to.

 

 

[Horton]

@BraceMaker I hate to be this blunt but I do not think Paul knows anything about ski and fin design. Watch his YouTube videos - total gibberish and BS.

[BraceMaker]

Not disagreeing. But that was 10 years ago+. I think for a guy on a tundra ridden lake in Canada to bother with the stuff is still impressive. He still has a good international trick ski binding market.

 

His fin is an animal of 2005 be not something modern. Heck Excel program

[andjules]

@ $34 CAD the price is certainly right. If I had enough water-time to experiment, I'd buy a couple of those, read up on the whisper fin and CG ideas, get out a dremel and start DIY-ing.

[thager]

DIY is fun and can save $$$$ to try something before you invest. Made my own CG classic from an old fin I had laying around.

[Deanoski]

@thager how did your diy cg classic work?

[thager]

Mild improvement over standard. Slightly more drag on KD Platinum ski.

[UCFskier]

the 300 bux you spend on a whisper fin would be better spent on some quality coaching... as @Horton said there is no magic bullet and it has all been done before. track down a local pro and ask to have a couple sets with them....

 

its no different that the golf market you can spend a million bucks on the gadgets that help stance, swing, and what ever else golfers do,,,, but a few sessions with a pro fixes most issues and allows ya all to be more proficient athletes

[Drago]

Ouch

[Wish]

UCFskier I agree. Stop buying new skis too. It's silly. Take that old Connelly Concept to the nearest ski coach. As for boats....pointless. Just stick with that 1981 Mastercrraft. All this stuffs been done before. Why do highly intelligent innovators much smarter then us even bother with countless hours of R&D? None of it has potential to improve our skiing for the $s spent. And by all means...swing that wooden driver and see how it goes <--- insert sarcasm font?

[thager]

Sorry @Wish Most of us don't have a bazillion dollars!

[Wish]

Thager... I'm one of those skiers. I know my boat, it's cruise control, my boots, vest are all older tech then yours. But all are vast improvements over previous ones and create advantages for me. Bazillion dallors not needed to take advantage of the innovations. Some of the new tech will work, some go to the wayside. To state.. save your money and just get coaching is a stretch. Like the gear, I've had some great coaches (Adams for example) and not so good being a waist of my money. I'm guessing a great deal of skiers thought money would be better spent on coaching then a roller blade boot fastened to a snow ski binding screwed to a ski. Id say the new Danali is a significant departure from the norm of skis out there including its fin. Just think of Horton's current glowing feedback and scores to match. Where would he be if he listened to someone telling him to not waist his time as that tech "has been tried before." Bring on the innovation.

[thager]

Touche! Couldn't agree more on actual new tech, but I spent a summer going backwards on the new tech. Couldn't even run my opener on it no matter the settings and help I got with it. Am now finally getting back to my average on old tech and old fin style. For me the new ski/fin/wing stuff was BS!

[Horton]

In my opinion most of the time if a skier is on reasonably current gear that works - coaching is the better investment. Sometimes new gear is better and sometimes new gear is not better. Chasing every new fad and gimmick is not the way to learn to ski better.

[LOTW]

Unfortunately coaching can be cost prohibitive, the Canadian dollar sucks and has for several years now, 35% or so. Being a gear head, which I'll bet most of us are, gear is a better way to go for me.

[Wish]

Thager.... I hear ya, I've tried ski gear that have sucked and been a waist of my time and money. It's just super hard to know.

 

This being one of if not the only outlet helps by providing a wide range of opinions posted over time. What works for one person doesn't mean it won't for others. Which is why Stevey Boy is asking. This includes the coaches. So one comment like...save your money as its been tried before (about something he's not even asking about) may hurt an innovator directly that may (or may not) actually be on to something. We don't have to chase new things if it's not finatially feasable. Typically I wait till the new innovations have been proven by a wider margin of skiers then just a few or one mans opinion no mater how good he is. My $$s are better spent that way for me and maybe I'll see a coach in the mean time. But the hope would be that many do try whatever it is so we can hear accross the board opinions.

 

Horton...agree...mostly

 

So, any opinions on this fin? I'm genuinely courious. Would like to see a pic of it too. ?

[Chef23]

For many skiers they have disposable income and it isn't a choice between a new ski and coaching they can do both. In addition many skiers (like me although I did just miss a chance to ski with Wade on my home lake) live somewhere that coaching isn't readily accessible. For me to get coaching costs more than a new ski when you factor in flights lodging, food and the cost of coaching. Plus trying new stuff is fun. If I was doing more than skiing for exercise right now I would be trying a new fin at a minimum.

 

I am not trying to minimize the benefit of coaching I always that think it is the best first choice but it isn't always either this or that.

[CBR51]

Completely agree with what Horton says.

[Bruce_Butterfield]

@wish try google for a pic of the fin. To be charitable its nothing special.

 

For some of the newbies, the guy behind FM and that fin has a long history on BOS and some other ski message boards. Horton was really polite with his opinions, but that guy thinks he’s a heckofalot smarter than he really is.

 

If any baller wants to learn what fin shapes do, you will be better off getting out the hacksaw, files and drills and experiment. If you want performance, get skijay’s book then a CG or whisper fin.

[thager]

@CBR51 And that may just be the problem!!!