eleeski

OK, I've had my fun at the expense of wakeboards too. But seriously, wakeboards are a fun toy and a useful tool. Yours is not worth enough to sell but might be valuable on a day you have guests or just want to play around. Open trickers out west started on wakeboards as kids. College kids use wakeboards as a stepping stone to better trick scores. We trained with some serious wakeboarders when learning flips and they are as dedicated and technical as any group of slalomers. World record holder Erika Lang is also a world class wakeboarder. Keep the thing and enjoy it! (Do take the fins off it to make the falls less painful.) Eric

Thanks guys for the support. There are a lot of good people here. In our little warm spell in the desert, I got to ski with @vic @jriester33 @MichaelWiebe . Fun times with the people who contacted me through this site. I probably should have contacted @Horton privately but I was rather upset. Things have been smoldering for a while between myself and John. But I still tried to have fun and be helpful. Having my integrity questioned (disinformation?) was too wrong. Back to the focus of the thread. As long as the ski is working for you, ride it! Maybe get a backup in case you drive over your special ski (or if @Dirt borrows it). Eventually a new ski will improve your skiing. Or make you appreciate your old one. Eric

@Horton Sure. Restore my access to the forums, get rid of the infinite pandas tag line and be open minded about posts (from me or anyone else) that are not in agreement with you and I'll buy the beer. I might even slalom if my old ski isn't too floppy. Eric

This is exactly the problem with social media. @Horton has an agenda. (When he claims that skis "breakdown" his ski selling advertisers get business selling replacement skis?) When a plastics engineer, ski designer, builder and tournament competitor disagrees with his agenda, he gets ridiculed, abused and muzzled. If there is only one view, reality gets skewed. (Are we to believe that composites in other industries behave differently than ski manufacturers? This is disinformation?) This post might be deleted. I'm prevented from not only commenting but even seeing posts in the Rules and Techniques forums. Potential conflicting views must be prevented? I've known John for a long time and would consider him a friend. I am upset by being bullied as a part of what seems to be manipulation of opinion for his site. I apologize for a public rant here. But infinite pandas might be funny for a while but it's getting very old and abusive. I will stand up for myself, my accomplishments, my opinions and my integrity. Eric

A waterski goes through 6 cycles per pass. Six passes per set. Three passes per day. Five month season. 6x6x3x150. 16,000 cycles per year. 80,000 cycles in a normal 5 year lifespan of a ski. Cycle times to failure are measured in MILLIONS of cycles in engineering analysis. Cheap polyethylene hinges may be rated in hundreds of cycles but solid structural critical parts are designed for lots of cycles. A waterski in normal tournament training is nowhere near any cycle limits. Your ski will last longer than you will. A new ski has tested improvements. Get a new ski to improve your buoy count - not because something has ruined your old one. Eric

I have had two skis fail longitudinally like your picture. A trick ski that I built with only unidirectional cloth needed some reinforcement across for the build. Lasted one run. While the ski didn't ski well, it didn't hurt me, fall apart on the water or fall apart during the run. Not good but not a safety issue. Note, I was not using a plate binding that would have helped structurally. The other ski was a wood slalom ski that split down the middle. I bolted a couple braces across the ski and kept using it. Again, no plate binding and no catastrophic failure. I'd watch it for deterioration but be OK skiing that ski. I've skied far unsafer skis. Eric On second thought, the ski is shot. Send it to me for proper disposal.

OK, I'll bite. I know that watching videos in freeze frame isn't proper judging, but if you watch those hitched T7s, the ski is in a different position after every frame. The rules do say that the ski must move continuously but say nothing about consistent rotational speed. Nor is the motion of the body relevant. So severe body hitches and slowing of the ski do not make a trick no credit! I stand by my comment that too many tricks are taken by overzealous (and improper) interpretations of the rules. A WO must be 360 degrees. But nobody can ever execute a WO to exactly 360 degrees. Not physically possible. I teach it with a 20 to 30 degree cut at the wake and a landing 20 degrees back at the wake. So a properly executed WO is 320 degrees - consistent with history but in conflict with the rule book. Beautiful 320 degree WOs have been scoring since day one. Those approved performances and records must stand and the rules must consider what happens in the real world. Since the rule book is subject to interpretation in real life, history must be our guide. Regina's approved record is the historical record that defines what a scoring buoy looks like. T7s (and other tricks) that score in the qualifying tournaments are the guide for us to strive for. Social media driving stricter applications of the rules (through horrible threads like this) are not valid. Tricks should be possible in the real world and buoys should only need to be rounded. Eric

@Horton The skis I tested were ones I thought were "dead" and well used. Hence the reference to work hardening. Riding a "dead" ski a couple years later gave good performance. It was me, not the ski. Of course, I have broken or damaged many skis and their performance was degraded. Not all damage is visible. Honeycomb skis got waterlogged and corroded. Polyurethane cores powdered. Bubbles formed on the skis. Delamination occurred. (Sometimes this happened on my skis and sometimes on factory skis.) Skis and materials have improved with time and are now quite robust. New skis are important for improving your skills more than accounting for age. Eric

@lpskier At my lake in the summer, the air temperature measurement would be the questionable one. Eric

The only mechanical tests of aging skis that I've seen and done have indicated that skis test out as stiffer as they age. Whether that is the resin just aging stiffer or work hardening is unclear. Regardless, it is a small measured difference and not a real breakdown of the skis. Old polyurethane cores did break down with stress cycles. This made them softer and more prone to breakage. Clark foam was the major supplier and went out of business (abruptly) about 20 years ago. Most of the modern cores are not polyurethane and hold up quite well with respect to both loads and age. Skis can get damaged and have properties change. Usually the damage is obvious or clear. Sometimes the durability will be OK but properties change (tough to recreate if you like it after the damage). Heat can be a problem. Like direct sunlight on a black ski that will get to 175f (we measured that!) and definitely soften resins allowing the ski to change from how it was molded. Which will change the feel of a ski. Of course, that kind of heat might delaminate the ski and obviously ruin the ski. Keep your skis out of the sun! Skis do get stale. You get too used to them and and your style is stifled. A new ski will expose you to different traits that challenge your skills - and improve your skiing. Do keep that old ski - it might respond well to your new skills! Eric On second thought, those old skis are shot. Send them to me for proper disposal.

Rhonda left us way too soon. She was an enthusiastic skier from the old days at the Shrimp Farm to her ongoing Imperial Lakes passion. A skilled skier who was improving strongly. Always upbeat and encouraging, she was a pleasure to hang with. She was a critical part of a great family - on so many levels. She is missed. But we are richer for having been part of her life and having her be part of ours. I'll treasure her welcoming warmth, needed reassurances and vibrant personality. We all were blessed to know her. Wonderful memories. Best wishes to the family. Eric

This is so wrong. The score was reviewed and approved. That should define what a scoring buoy is. I hope you guys aren't judges for me. "There's a possibility that that W5F could be slid so I'm going to no credit it!" Happens too often, I'm tired of it and this thread is making that more common. Let's just score everything zero and bitch at @JeffSurdej about declining skier numbers. @Horton This thread is sucking the fun out of skiing. We can't even enjoy Regina's record. Eric

I was taught to judge "there must be proof that the skier DIDN'T make it". It looks like she made it, there's a frame where she is outside the buoy, there's enough frames with her holding on long enough to score at least 1/4, those frames also show inward movement enough to earn 1/2, and this is the official video. You are damaging the integrity of the sport by questioning the results based on a non official possible conspiracy theory video. Regina "may" have gotten credit - no, she DID earn credit, officially! Regina is a skilled skier who knows exactly what she needs to do to score. This thread is wrong on many levels. Eric

John, what is up? Why resurrect this thread? The decision was made by qualified judges and the record stands. You seem to be harping on an excessively strict applications of the rules. Maybe it's good for traffic at the site but it is horrible for the sport. We do not need second guessing of performances or criticism of officials who never give benefit of doubt to the skier. Skiing should be fun. Quit nit picking and go ski. Eric

Crazy wintertime project (note the snow in Tahoe). A giant but legal trick ski. Works well for surface turns at very slow speeds (14 to 15mph). Not great for wake tricks but they were possible going faster (17mph). A converted kids wakeboard. Eric

@Jody_Seal Old school binding, old school honeycomb core, old school rubber edges - new ski! Proof that the old ways were pretty good. Eric

Jody, that's an antique, isn't it? New skis rock! Eric

PP Classic 3 event is a great training setup. Your course will need magnets. Your driver will need to know times. But you can adjust baseline RPM to get close (or hit a desired speed). You can adjust skier weight to get closer - or help out a bit. Since PP Classic is not GPS based, it is not a slave to perfect times. You won't get hammered to be in tolerance. Excellent feel for learning. You also save a couple bucks and it's an easy setup. PP Classic in trick mode with the paddlewheel is as good as ZO. And way better than wakeboard RPM mode for tricking and wakeboarding. The paddlewheel is critical for tricking and wakeboarding. Your existing paddlewheel should work (maintenance is required to be sure your paddlewheel is free and undamaged and the connection is good - I went through a couple). I don't like the slalom feel of Stargazer and it isn't good enough for my tricks without the paddlewheel. Zbox is better but I don't have much personal time behind it. Some guys are training effectively with Zbox to pretty high levels of slalom. You can upgrade from Classic when you get serious about tournaments. 3 Event is a superior option. Definitely a worthwhile upgrade. Eric

Still skiing. PM me. Eric

@Jetsetr I looked up the weight of a 5.7 engine at about 500 pounds to make sure my truck could haul them back from Texas. Once loaded, the mechanic looked at my flattened springs and squished tires and said "you know those engines weigh about 900 pounds as a marine conversion?" That was a hairy drive home in a massively overloaded Ranger. Traditional engines are quite heavy. In a tournament environment, batteries could be replaced at short intervals with a quick swap system. Possibly expensive but certainly not a weight deal breaker. Acceptance of electric boats will only happen with getting some out on the water. @cougfan 's project is worthwhile. Especially if things like motor and battery suppliers are shared with us. My 04 MC project is waiting for an electric conversion. Eric

Is that a Nash Metropolitan in the background? Going to do a writeup of that? Eric

The unit I purchased in 2017 had Rev Q. It was the older style non touch screen. It had + settings. My 2011 MC was upgraded to Rev R by the TC at a tournament where it was used. When I power up the boat, the revision number is temporarily displayed on the Aquastar greeting screen. Eric

@Mick04 Yes, the old heads worked fine. One was the Mastercraft stock head from 2011 running Rev R and the other was a replacement 3 event generic head from 3 years ago running Rev Q. You do have to give ZO the serial number from the head which can be a pain to access - at least on the MC that was the hardest part of the job (stupid design but I was replacing the fuel gauge at the time so I had the panel apart). The programming is from a plug on the engine. Easy to access once you find it. ZO instructions and help were very good. Eric

@pcmcon729 I converted my 2011 MC. The antenna wasn't terribly expensive (less than 2 new old antennas). The program was very reasonable. I found cables to borrow ( thanks to @Not_The_Pug ) and was able to figure how to convert my boats. It did take me all summer to get around to the update. I ran all summer on one puck with the bad (worse?) puck only. The other puck varied speeds by 2 mph. Pretty unskiable with the bad puck plugged in. The other puck was pretty reliable unless the boat was running nonstop hours. Seemed to get better over the summer (but the bad puck stayed bad). Regardless, I'm liking the new single puck. Rev S was a fun experiment but I didn't switch to it. I have it for those who want it. And my boat isn't quite so obsolete - might have to pull some C tournaments now. Eric

@aupatking Good observation. Likely true as they were early glass skis and definitely using foam in the mid 70s when I worked for Kimball. They sold enough skis to count as a real player. And they tried to get to the elite slalom equipment zone - I worked for them trying to mass produce the LaPoint Ajax ski. Good company. @thager I think Saucier used honeycomb. Honeycomb was the magic high tech core of the time. Saucier was a pretty advanced ski company with a tournament focus. The EP built Obrien Mach One was the first foam core ski I saw in the course. Early 70s. Foam core technology has come a long way. Eric