owennibley

@Maxsend I like how stable the gopro makes it. I tried skidoc with phone setup and it was horrendous. The only thing I don't like on your videos you posted is it's hard to see the details on the skier. Is that because of the FOV? Is the H10 better for that? If zoomed in more is it still clear? I was 2 or 3 clicks away from purchase of the H11 but chickened out because I didn't know for sure if it would work how I wanted it to.

@escmanaze I skied Goode Lake last week and it took about 4 passes to get my bearing sorted out. On one of my passes headed north, I'd thought I would get a early start to the pull out. I pull out early, then saw what I thought were entrance gates and went for it. Well.... those weren't the entrance gates. They were the 6 ball guide bouys the other way so I was REALLY early on that pass. lol. I'm sure if I skied there regularly, I would get used to the course setup but I don't think I'd EVER get used to how rushed the gates are. Both sides are 90 degree turn ins and to get the timing right would depend so much on the driver. But you work with what you got. I'm glad they opened it up to having memberships/passes there.

Honestly, it comes down to time (and liability). It takes a fair amount of effort to do public nights and even more for a tournament. Most lake owners don't want to be bothered by taking the effort to hold the events, although some do like yours. Also, I would be supporting and skiing in a tournament this weekend, however, I refuse to pay the $100 late fee on TOP of the $70 entrance fee as I didn't have my weekend cleared up yet. I'm more than willing to pay a realistic late fee ($20-30) but $100.... Come on now. People on this forum and sport complain the sport is dying off, which is most likely true. But in my opinion, it is the very people complaining about high boat prices and how the sport is dying that are contributing to the sport dying by not allowing access to the course or private lakes. Which is completely fine, I have zero problem with that, its their property and they worked hard to accrue it, but then don't complain when the sport is only confined to the 0.01% that have private lake access.

While everyone has their own idea and what works for them, I see decreasing the speed or using practice mode (in between the speeds) as a hugely beneficial tool. I don't disagree that the different speeds changes multiple variables like @jhughes but the fundamentals stay the same. If a skier is very comfortable running 32 and has rarely or never practiced/ran 34, I think it is very unwise to immediately bump them into 34 because it is so different. Injuries could occur, frustration of not making passes, etc. but bumping them to 32.7 then, 33.3, 33.7, 34.2 is a much safer and gradual process while getting confident for those faster speeds. As a coach of an elite sport (mens gymnastics) I just don't tell my students when learning a new (potentially dangerous) skill "go and try it and well see what happens and hope for the best, then we'll make adjustments from there". I won't allow my students to even try a double back flip if they can't do a single back flip. Then there are 100's of drills they could do before they are ready to even attempt a double back flip. Small progression steps give the best possibility for success. One small step at a time, master that progression (or close to mastery) and then move on to the next step. Pretty soon you'll have the new skill or pass. Obviously, the harder the skill or pass, the longer it takes to learn and more precise and consistent the student has to be. Heck, I regularly ski the hovercraft at 19mph and it has helped me understand and learn many things that I apply to my 34mph passes. Now I'm not an elite skier of even a good skier by any means but to say you shouldn't practice at a slower speeds because it feels different is not an accurate assessment (IN MY OPINION). Each pass builds on the next and going back to a slower speed or longer line lengths allows time to work on the fundamentals, which applies to every speed and length. Everyone has their own method and finding out what your specific secret recipe for success is.... now that is the challenge.

91-94 Prostar 190. Best wake for all speeds up to 32' off. 94 is the unicorn with EFI as mentioned before. Recently sold my 92 for a 2015 Prostar.... I miss my 92. Such a good looking boat, but I love having zero off on my 2015. 95-97ish Prostar 190 the wakes are really hard. I will do everything I can to not ski behind my ski partners 96 190. I personally wouldn't consider Malibu until after 1998. I think the quality got better after that. However, the best wakes I've skied coupled with a great driving experience would be 2002+ Response LX. Might be out of your desired price range though. I don't have a lot of experience with the Ski Nautiques. But they seem to have a good following. My vote would be 91-94 prostar 190 (or even the 205). Best of luck.

@Frank_MA I understand your dilema now. Between the 68 Omega and the 67 Omega MAX, I personally would go with the MAX. I seem to like shorter skis as I am not that tall @ 5'10". But it is all personal preference and I don't think you could make a wrong decision. Both are great skis. There is a new 68" Omega Max on skiitagain.com https://www.ski-it-again.com/php/skiitagain.php?endless=summer&topic=Search&category=Slalom&postid=63941

@Frank_MA My understanding of the Pro is that it is a much deeper concave ski. That allows the ski to sit deeper in the water and really bleed speed off coming into the buoy. So if you were to get late and in trouble you could really crank on the ski and maybe pull a little longer than normal and it would be able to slow you down enough before you get to the next buoy. The Omega (or Omega MAX), in my opinion, is very much a finesse ski. It does not require near as much energy as a deeper concave ski and is easier on the body. However, the trade off is that you may not be able to make up time or bleed speed off as easily as the PRO. I think it tends to be more technique dependent rather than brute force. 2 completely different designs & feeling on the water. I prefer the Omega, less energy approach, my ski partner prefers the PRO and loves it. One is not better, just different. I could be WAY off on this so maybe @savaiusini could expound on the different skis.

@Frank_MA My 2020 Omega was a 67. I was right on the edge of needing a 68 but I tried to make the 67 work, which it did at 34mph. At 32mph I was fighting the ski and was just too deep in the water. My Omega MAX is a 67 as well. Much better feel at 32mph. I constantly drop to 32mph to practice 28-32off and it is a much better ski for that. And like I said before, when I bump up to 34mph, I don't notice a loss of performance compared to my 2020 Omega.

I am. I love it. I can slow down to 32mph or even 30mph (I'm 190lbs) and it feels totally fine. Then I bump it to 34mph and I don't feel any loss of performance from my 2020 Omega. Perfect ski for me.

I am in a similar situation. I've skied double boots for close to 20 years and last year because of back issues tried the RTP. It was an epic disaster. However, here is my theory on why it didn't work out. I started using the RTP at the very END of the season. I was in the best ski shape and was skiing really well. Insert the RTP and I lost about 2 passes. Very frustrating. So I chalked it up to the RTP and stayed with DB. Well, the start of this season, I knew I couldn't continue with deep water starts with DB, so I went back to the RTP at the BEGINNING of this season and if I lose passes because of it, so be it. At least my back will feel better. Well, I'm back to hitting my normal passes with a RTP this season. I think because I had such a long off season to forget all my technique, starting the season with the RTP and relearning the nuances of the RTP from the beginning of the season really helped me get used to it.

@MattP Yes I did. One of the Adams gave me some pointers and what to do which I greatly appreciated but ultimately, the C75 was too hard on my back getting up and exerted too much energy to ride, among other reasons. I tagged both the Adams on this thread asking for CG fin settings and they did not respond. Look, I get it. I don't expect them to drop everything and help a random dude with a ski setup. They have put a lot of time in their product and a lot of people seem to like their skis/products, but for a multitude of reasons (not just the one listed here), their products did not gel with me. I got caught up on all the reviews and talk thinking that I found THE ski. I have not read or heard one review that the Denali products didn't work for people and I think consumers need to have the other side to make a more informed decision. Could their products work for me? Sure, but summer is short and time on water is even shorter, I can't guinea pig my way through an entire summer working on fin setups. I went with what works and is proven on my HO.

Well I'm gonna chalk this up as another failed Denali experience. I lost $1000 on the C75 after paying full price and then selling it, trying to recoup some of the money. I did make an honest attempt (25+sets) on the ski. I gave the CG fin another honest go on my Omega Max and after 2 months of skiing and multiple fin settings I'm tapping out. I put the syndicate fin back on at factory settings and it was amazingly better, ran up to my PB within 3 passes. I didn't even come close on the CG fin. Unless you live on a lake, ski multiple sets a day, and have the time and patience to constantly change/fiddle with your fin, probably not your cup of tea. I prefer to use my time skiing, as my time on the water is limited. I know there are a lot of Denali fans out there and I will get a lot of hate but I think consumers need to hear the good experiences AND the bad experiences to make a more informed decision on products. Its not all rainbows and unicorns for everyone out there in Denali land. This doesn't mean it won't work for someone else; these are just my opinions/experiences. To each his own. Thank you to the ballers that responded initially and gave suggestions, I appreciate the help!

@Bruce_Butterfield Roger that. Thank you for the input and help. I will try the stock setting (-.03 dft) with the CG Fin and report back.

@BraceMaker when I was on a regular OMEGA I was using a factory fin but when I switched to the OMEGA Max I wanted to try the CG Fin so I have not used the Syndicate factory fin on this ski. I'm about 2 sets from going back to the factory fin! @Bruce_Butterfield Thank you! I will try the factory settings but back 0.030" on the DFT. I was using the recommended settings that Denali has on their website for the CG Fin.... maybe they are outdated? or maybe the settings they have on there is for their own skis? https://denaliskis.com/products/cg-fin (CG Fin setup link is down at the bottom of the page.) @AdamCord @adamhcaldwell any advice or direction?

Alright guys, I'm desperate. Just went skiing this morning and something needs to change. ANY help with fin measurements will be appreciated. My onside is perfect...crisp, sharp, taut line, super early to offside ball. Awesome. Offside is like trying to turn an 18 wheeler. Slow long and fat. I barely get to the ball in time and start the process over again. Here is where I am at per the recommended Denali CG Fin settings: 28.5 - boot .92 - DFT 2.53 - Depth 6.74 - Length 8Deg Just in general, which way should go to start making it better? Increase depth & shorten? Decrease depth and lengthen? Not getting good sets in is killing my skiing vibe! Thanks in advance!

Is anyone running the CG fin on their OMEGA Max? I went with the Denali recommended setup to start with but I am having a hard time getting the offside to turn quick enough. The onside is an absolute rocket... wow. Any help or recommendations would be appreciated!

Got my PB on Tuesday in northern Utah.... 3@32 off 34mph. Mid 60's with water being around 50°F. Weather is looking good for one last set tomorrow and then after that the weather turns for the worse. It's been a great season!

If anyone is in the market for the HO Omega, I would highly recommend this ski. I came off a CX Superlite for the past 3 years and decided to get a new ski. I have been getting into 28'@34 so not amazing skier but I thought a change would be good. I did buy the Denali C-75 thinking that it would be my savior into getting to 32'-35'off. I did get tie my PB on the Denali and it is a very capable ski, just not for me I guess (its for sale on SIA if interested). I hopped on the Omega and immediately felt stable and the turns crisp. Within 3 sets I tied my PB and it felt amazing. To quote Horton, it is "wicked fast". I didn't have to mess with settings or anything. Just mounted up bindings and skied. Also, I used much less energy to ski the same amount on other skis, which is good for my bum back and elbows. I plan on getting a few buoys at 32' before the season ends. Just in case someone needed that extra push to try this ski.... DO IT. You won't regret it.

@Anderson I don't like to hear that. I am pretty much exactly where you are at skill wise. My 22' passes are very consistent right now and I'm working on my 28' passes hoping the Denali ski would make it easier. I ordered a Large Standard Flex RFF... should be here tomorrow but dang I should've waited just a tad longer for yours! What exactly didn't you like on it? Do you have any video or specific feedback?

I have the supershell 4.0 and I would get the Syndicate hardshell (edge bindings are basically the same.) The reason for me is on the 4.0 I have the 3D printed heel cup and toe piece and I've replaced them 3 times already. Not sure if the 5.0 comes standard with the carbon pieces but if I'm putting up 500+ bones for just a binding, I expect all aspects of the binding to last more than 1 season with no problems. Other than that I have no problems with the 4.0 supershell.

I've rebuilt a couple sunk boats. Water sat in them for too long and the engines had to be rebuilt so don't wait to get the water out of the engine. With regards to electrical, it depends. Newer boats with touch screen, zero off, etc will most likely be problematic but honestly, I've had minimal electrical problems with the boats that I've worked on. Now, I'm not saying electrical problems could arise in the future because of the exposure to water but my opinion is just drain the water from the engine and fuel systems, dry the boat out and try it.

Well... based on the feedback due to this forum, I ordered a Denali ski today. Hopefully it gets here in a week or so, then I can start getting new PB's. :)

@savaiusini is that the date as well for the gloves? I saw the HOs video that there was a clincher type glove...? :)

I too am looking to buy a rear venom boot. I keep checking HO's website.

Going along with the first post... I never messed with fins at all. I ride a CX Superlite and left everything stock, or so I thought. These past 2 weeks I feel like I hit a major wall. Wasn't being consistent, ski felt like it lost grip on my offside, just really iffy at best. I had some pretty bad crashes and I was at a loss to why. I decided to measure the fin and check to make sure it was at the stock settings. Either I don't know how to measure them or they were way off. Original: 29.75 6.875 2.516 .761 7° Changed to: 29.5 6.860 2.510 .775 7° I skied this morning and oh boy was it weird. I was all over the place. After a couple passes I got comfortable and my offside is money now. Super stable and grips the water great. My onside still needs some work but I was able to get 2 passes in a row at 34@22' which was good. I know I broke the cardinal rule of only changing one thing at a time but... :D So I guess my point is, if you've hit a wall or plateau, check your settings and make sure they are what you think they are. It might help.