Dano

To increase speed you need to increase the force applied to the ski by putting more ski in the water, while increasing roll angle, or increasing cross course angle. Lean angle doesn’t necessarily result in any of those. I do think it’s possible to try to lean too far and flatten the ski due to ankle flexion. if you can figure out how to first create speed with less cross course angle, you can then increase cross course angle without creating more speed or increasing load.

I do it all myself. I've owned my boat ('89 centurion falcon) for 20 years. These inboards are incredibly reliable. Oil change and impeller every year. Outside of that I've replaced my starter 2 times, new dampner plate, new seals and bushing in rudder box, new steering cable, new shift and throttle cables, replaced all hoses, and a stringer repair that had to be dealt with. I did do several upgrades over the years that include new propeller and shaft, upgrade to electronic ignition, and added Stargazer. All in all i'd say that was pretty minimal over the course of 20 years. It runs very well and in my opinion it skis very well too. I don't think the wakes give up anything to the newer boats. Tracking isn't as good but I mean a little input from the driver solves that. It is a wood stringer boat and that is it's downfall. If i can upgrade to a newer boat with composite construction for a reasonable price I would consider it, but at this point the boat owes me nothing. I could redo the stringers and floor, and foam for relatively cheap and enjoy this boat until i'm too old to ski anymore. Not bad for an original purchase price of $7500 for a boat that was 12 years old at that time.

Strength and stability likely help you no matter what sport you are doing and being lighter seems like an obvious advantage, but knowledge is at the top of the list too. @twhisper has a great website www.trainwithterrywinter.com loaded with great tutorials, videos, and a forum for questions and answers. It’s a tremendous resource and value at only $19/mth. A lot of the videos are of TW himself side by side with another skier. so you do get to see an amazing skiers movements compared with explanations of why he is achieving a higher level. To me this is step one of improving. You have to know what you are trying to accomplish.

@Drago I’ll agree he is not spiking ZO as heavier skiers would. He does still load and zero off will still be responding. He still has to manage that the same as the rest of us. Yes I know he is lighter and the forces created may be less as a result but he also is not as strong as a fully grown professional athlete. To me his success is a result of what he is doing either differently or better than others and not just him simply being lighter.

I see him coming back to the handle with less angle, getting stacked, and then really driving into CL as he increases cross course angle. Does hooking up with less angle like that allow him to maintain more speed, therefore he doesn’t have to spike ZO until he is closer to CL or at all? Does that extra speed make the earlier edge change possible?

@jhughes At -32 are you saying the rope load is decreasing in comparison to what you have been taking at -28? That is correct but I don't think the rope load required to run -32 is less than what is required to run -28. From what you are describing. It sounds like you have a tendency to really load up into the wakes, making it hard to manage thru CL as all that pressure has to be released by giving up your connection/stack, or moving to the inside too soon, or likely both of those things. By attempting to "pull" less or reduce rope tension at -32 you are better able to manage things and stay stacked and connected which sets you up for that nice edge change and approach into the buoy. I had a similar experience as you recently and spent a lot of time working at longer lines and learning to run them without "pulling". It's still a work in progress and in fact my buoy count is lower than it was before. The difference is that I am running right up to my PB nearly every set rather than just when the stars align.

Lapoint is recommending 12”, I think the convo starts at 35s.I do agree with Horton that 12” likely needs to adjust for smaller skiers on smaller skis. I saw this video last summer and measured my setup. I was at 11.5”. I moved it to 12”. I don’t think it’s a significant difference, maybe slightly more control of the back of the ski.

@JoelHowley you mention peak load is at exit of ball, are you thinking of reducing load just a little into CL or are you more just trying to maintain what you created thru CL?

My Quiksilver 2mm is the warmest I've ever had, durable, flexible, comfortable, reasonable price.

another angle, Dane, loaded after the wakes with next to no weight on ski. I think you can also see how the ski has begun to point more down course than across course while his upper body has remained still/calm. I think he's working extremely hard at this point to contain the ski under neath him and not allowing his alignment/connection to break even a little bit .

I think if you watch the spray coming off the ski of pro skiers you will see that the spray coming off their cutting edge does not continue past CL. An early edge change does not mean they are on the turning edge by CL. It just means they are no longer pressuring that edge and have begun to roll the ski out of angle. If you create enough speed into CL you no longer need to create, so you can un weight the ski as you become the weight swinging on the end of the rope. It is your weight and centrifugal force that is pulling the rope around the pylon from the wakes to the ball. I hope i have that right. It's how I think of it anyhow.

I think zbox plays a huge role in making PP more skier friendly. Just as mapping the course properly will also enable perfect pass to provide a better pull for the skier. I'm using stragazer zbox with an old carbureted motor. I have KX set at ++. I'm no short line guy but i ski at 34mph -32 and my buoy count is the same behind my boat or zero off boats. they do feel different but they are not polar opposites. I think PP and zero off are now more alike than they are different. As has been said before ZO isn't always the same from boat to boat either. For Me PP is close enough.

I think the guys that have installed sniper on marine applications use the o2 sensor to create an initial tune. Once they have that you can save that map and run in an open loop so they no longer need the O2 sensor. Something like sniper could be a good solution for the older carbed boats. My boat runs a 351w carbed with an upgraded prop. It runs very well and I have zero interest in spending money to get EFI or even zero off. It works very well the way it is with Perfect pass. I honestly do not notice a huge difference when skiing my own boat vs a zero off boat. Now at some point my boat will need a new motor. when that time comes if there is a reasonably priced engine with e controls available to purchase I would very likely shell out the extra cash at that time. The caveat here is that that new motor has to be significantly cheaper than me simply buying a used boat with zero off. Is there anybody who is refurbishing marine engines and selling them complete including fuel injection, and ECU?

Manufacturers producing this product is never going to happen for all the reasons already stated. I think Jody Seal is doing the repowers regularly and can tell me this is a bad idea but here goes. If a guy sourced an engine supplier (maybe something that isn’t even currently offered) or just did complete rebuilds of the newer motors with econtrols, and developed a kit that could be more of a plug and play install for some older but popular hulls maybe there is a market for that?

What’s the time line for their handles to hit the market?

Single best thing I did was sign up for @twhisper ’s online coaching. So much good info! He can really help you to understand where your own skiing is at and where you are trying to get to. From there you have to figure out how to execute things on the water. Having the knowledge of what it should look like and why, makes it a lot easier to try to emulate it in your own efforts. Often times you have to take some steps backwards to break old habits and learn new skills. Sometimes those new skills are just new bad habits that are hopefully slightly better than the old.

Single best thing I did was sign up for @twhisper ’s online coaching. So much good info! He can really help you to understand where your own skiing is at and where you are trying to get to. From there you have to figure out how to execute things on the water. Having the knowledge of what it should look like and why, makes it a lot easier to try to emulate it in your own efforts. Often times you have to take some steps backwards to break old habits and learn new skills. Sometimes those new skills are just new bad habits that are hopefully slightly better than the old.

@BrennanKMN trainwithterrywinter.com

if you are using PP stargazer, give re mapping the course a try.

I think the wheelie thesis that @MarcusBrown informed us all about is on full display, as @Drago and @Vernon Reeve have pointed out.

For me it always comes down remaining strong all the way thru the wakes (shoulders tend to come forward slightly) and leaving the wakes connected with handle tight to hips.

Need higher octane fuel. For sure this is my problem.

Wow was that entertaining! Regina and Jamie displayed some fantastic skiiing and just how competitive these athletes are. Will and Fred are again displaying the competitiveness, determination, and skill at the highest level. was just awesome to watch. TWBC brought it all right into my living room.

@slow I just read that thread again. I agree with what was said there. D3's lead designer uses a reflex front and perhaps that is the binding that has the most influence over the insert locations and stock settings? Makes sense since D3's top skier mounts his Tfactor back (towards back of ski) from center hole. Note: I got this information from TW on his train with TW forum.

I have heard that t factor places your ankle as much as 1/2” forward of a reflex when measured from the recommended measuring points. Where radar is on that comparison I don’t know. I have also heard that ankle placement is a good reference point but isn’t the whole story either as each binding reacts differently so a t factor user might prefer a different position than a reflex user. I don’t know much about ski design but My experience with the R2 is that you need to get far enough forward to rock onto the flat spot. If you are too far back it may want to ride on the tail rocker requiring more effort to engage the front of the ski which can feel like an unsettling rocking motion as you move forward. For me using radar carbitex measuring to the bottom stitch I have to be 1/8” forward of stock at least. I initially thought that might be too far and tried pulling back 1/16th, and the magic was lost . Jumped in the boat moved it forward and there’s the sweet spot again. Just my experience.