Roger

lkb, I'll send you an email also, but here is the info you asked for:  It is a 66" Yellow, skied on about a month in like new condition and comes with all the hardware and sleeve that came with it. Price is $1000.00  If you have followed the Fischer threads on here, this is the ski my friend bought when I got mine (we bought them together to save on shipping). He has had the fin clamp milled .0012 so that it will accomidate any fin (this was done so he could use his Carbon Fin).

lkb,  There may be a 66" Yellow for sale at my lake, are you interested?

I am using a 13" Radius B2i. I changed bars in my first handle once and it took a few minutes to work the old handle out (with the tool). Inserting the new bar was pretty easy, but it's not as positive a "snap" as I would like when it seats. However, I've had no issues with it. If you do not get the handle seated properly, you risk the handle coming apart while pulling, not so good a thing...  I do not think it changes easy enough to do it between skiers.  I do like the $14.00 cost of the handle change though /vanillaforum/js/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-laughing.gif

Turkey said: "Interesting. The "put in real weight & add/subtract rpm" comes strait from USAWS as the proper way to retain gate pull and SSB (PX also if used). " I can find no reference to this on the USAWS website, can you point me to it please? In addition, I asked one of the best senior slalom drivers on the planet (pulls Open, had the world record tied, pulls Big Dawg, etc.) about it and the response was "Never had a skier give anything other than speed, weight, KX, and PX. Then I sent an email to one of the clinic hosters who was on the speed control commitee until last year. He responded the same way, "never heard of that."  Neither of them is aware of the USAWS information you site...

You were told wrong. I have seen the ski used to make the mold, it is a 9200.

The shape is a replica of the 9200, I know this for a fact. The flex is different, hence the different fin settings (close to the Goode though).

What do you all think of the changes to fin and wing settings since the move to Jodi Fisher's care from the original site? Below are the original numbers from the Austrian site and the current numbers from Jodi's US site: Original Fischer Site: Length (Tips): 6.998 Depth: 2.454 DFT: .645 Wing: 9 New Fisher Site: Length (Tips): 6.998 for 34, 6.959 for 36 Depth: 2.459 for 34, 2.500 for 36 DFT: .640 for 34, .626 for 36 Wing 8 Comments?

Who is doing the coaching can make a huge difference. I just took my first lesson after 18 years competing two weekends ago. I'm one of the can run 35 crowd but not consistently and stuck at 2@38 as a tournament PB for several years now. So, I went to see Chet Raley two weekends ago. Now many people have watched and tried to help from the boat with varying degrees of success. But, Chet has an incredible eye for what is causing you difficulty and where it's starting. I just skied like I always do without discussion up front (he didn't ask and I didn't offer). This is just what I wanted since I didn't want him having any preconceptions before watching and trying to help me. My perceived problem is being a bit narrow and fast coming into my offside turn even though everyone says I have a great onside lean. Chet's take after watching me run one 28 was: "Well, I can see we need to work on your transition into your offside turn." Seems I change edges so hard that I turn into the bouy instead of carrying out and wind up (you guessed it) narrow, fast, and with slack. This doesn't keep me from running 28 and 32 consistantly, but does catch up to me at 35 and beyond. He suggested that I have such a good onside lean that I should just try to stand up and go flat off the 2nd wake. He said with the lean I have, I will not be able to go flat, but my carry out should be much better with closer to the proper amount of inward lean and the line should stay tight. To say he nailed it would be absolutely correct! I have never skied so easily as my next 7 passes in the lesson. After returning to Okeeheelee, I ran my next 6 of 8 35 attempts, a percentage I've never before attained. I called to schedule my next session today... Sounds like your 3 hour drive to Ty's was well worth it to me. Stick with the guy who you can relate to. The other guy may be the perfect coach for someone else, but maybe not for you...

Horton said: "I have been told to no re-rate myself and to do it with Revs because . . . errrr because someone smart told me to. Thought that it had something to do with how PP does diffent stuff with extra weight vs. extra revs. " There are a lot if interesting comments in this thread, I'll say that. Here is my response (and I'm certainly not the expert or law on such things).  First, you are right that the kx and px and gate factors are dependent on the entered weight. However, if you pull less than your real weight, wouldn't you want that? KX (how aggresive the throttle responds to your pull) would be a bit less as would PX and the gate factor if entering a lesser weight. Opposite for entering a greater weight of course. Second, as a driver I can say that I'd much rather start every skier off on the opening pass with the same offset (zero on no wind days). In my experience, many skiers give their real weight (or lie about it), but do not give any offset nor is there any provision on starting dock boards for a starting offset. Therefore, I would (and do) get something other than an actual on these skiers. When a skier gives me their pulling weight, I can get an actual or very near it every opening pass. If a skier says 190lbs and a +30 offset and I have a +10/-10 wind, I have to start at +40 and remember the offset I started at (not that big a deal for me, but I know some drivers that would struggle). I have been to three driver clinics and have never heard anyone say the skier should put in a weight and an offset. I'll have to do some research on that one. I'll let you know what I find out.

John, I don't really disagree with anything you said there, it's probably more perception than anything.  The usual reasoning here is that if you make the turn in on the tail, the rest of the ski "falls" into the water late causing the skier to over pressure the ski (this is handled easier by a RFF than us lefties). Then sometime about the first wake, the skier winds up being pulled up and angled towards the one ball instead of being cast out wide. The perception, if not the reality, for the skier is narrow and fast at the one ball. A controlled turn in using the normal part of the ski (water breaking in front of the front binding) allows the skier to maintain a consistant pull and angle through the 2nd wake. I don't pretend to have all the answers, but I know when I get this right, the edge change is nearly automatic and I "feel" slow and wide at the 1 ball.  I totally agree with your comments on the new found width at 2 ball...

"Harold is great, he got me through my first 28off's 6 years ago. Doesn't he run 41off sometimes?" His PB is 3@41. I believe it's 2@41 in a tournament. Keep the video camera rolling if possible, it will help you and anyone trying to help you... Roger

I see some things to work on for sure. Your pull out to the glide and width look ok to me for LLF (I am LLF also). Your turn in is entirely on the tail, the water is breaking behind the front binding. This is costing you angle through the gates and giving you extra speed. Your edge change is a little slow, but that will probably improve with a proper gate anyway. Now for my suggestions. I had nearly the same gate as you when one of my skiing buddies (Harold Hintringer, who runs 39 @ 36mph) asked me to change. Here is his advice to me: 1) When you reach the glide, stand directly over the front binding, not leaned back. Look at a shot of Chris Parrish for how this should look. 2) When you initiate your turn in to the gates, do it from that same position and initiate with your hips (not by rocking your shoulders back). 3) Once you complete the turn and attian your lean, hold that position to the 2nd wake, don't try to pull harder, don't let up, just maintain. I couldn't believe how much this helped me. I'm wide and slow for 1 ball, even at -38. The real icing on the cake though was last weekend when I took my first lesson ever from Chet Raley. He found my real problem right away and is really helping me. One thing he said to me though is that my gate is one of the better looking two handed gates he has seen. If you know who Chet Raley is, you know he's seen a lot of gates... Don't know if this will work as well for you, but give it a try and see what happens.

I mean, when you're "scaring the boat crew," are you still able to get your usual average or do you get the ski going so fast you can't slow down and wind up with 1.5 or something else short of your usual? I know if I really get on it across the wakes into my offside, I have trouble slowing down to a managable speed for the turn with a wing, I can only wonder how difficult that would be without one. I feel the wing helps in three places. 1) Glide for the gates (though this should just be an adjustment of how one pulls out when no wing is used). 2) Slowing down after trouble starts. 3) It helps keep the tail in the water during an aggresive turn (see #2). I also believe the ski makers do their testing and designing with a wing in mind. From what I've seen around here (Okeeheelee), you can get the same bouy count either way, but it seems the wing allows a bit more margin for error when things go wrong... "I do not think 34 mph skiers should need to slow down but I am comming around to think that wing stablity and maybe keeping the ski under me more could be good." Personally, I think when you get to 38 and beyond, it's ALL about being able to slow down. Anyone can accelerate, it's those that know when and how to decelerate that run the shortest lines.

I'd like to add something from just this weekend. One of the guys I pull a lot is Harold Hintringer, an Austrian skier who runs into 41 off @ 58k on a Fischer. Last weekend, he changed from his 66" Yellow with wing to a 68" Yellow without a wing. I pulled him during the week and he ran a very nice 39 his first set, but missed it a couple of times the next. Yesterday I pulled him again and he ran what felt like another very nice 39. After the set, I commented how well he seemed to be skiing on the longer ski (he weighs 175lbs) without a wing. He responded that he put the wing back on but at a reduced 7 degrees instead of the usual 9 degrees.  He said that as long as everything went perfectly, the 39 without the wing was great. However, if anything went wrong and he had to play catchup, he feels the ski will not shut down as fast when he has extra speed. With the wing, he feels he has a wider margin of error when things don't go just right. This seem logical to me. JT, you seem to be running right around 3 or 4 @ 38 with and without the wing. Is this also true when you're having to hack a bit?

You're not giving your "real stats" if you have to have 30 revs added for an actual. You should be giving your pulling weight, not your real weight. For example, I weigh about 187lbs right now, but give 175 as my weight in tournaments. This achieves actuals with no wind and zero entered. We have a Women 3 skier in our club who weighs 130lbs, but has to give 110lbs or gets burned. It's your pulling weight that you should give the driver. Adding or reducing rpms are to compensate for wind and such. For CC I use Normal KX (no switch on any). For MC I use Normal. For MB I use ++. There is one MC down here (South Florida) that I will use + or ++ on next time I get it, it just feels too soft compared to the other MC's I've drawn here. CC uses 4 blade prop and 1.26 tranny. MC uses 4 blade prop and the powerslot version used to use 1.5 tranny. I think current models use 1.29 (can't remember exactly, but it's close to what CC uses). MB uses 4 blade prop and 1.0 tranny. This is the reason it feels different than the other boats (IMO). It is not able to create the torque a geared tranny is and therefor pulls longer resulting in a chase the handle kind of feel. ++ causes a harder, but shorter pull which I feel makes the boat closer the the other two in terms of the feel of the pull. YMMV

I have used a variety of rubber bindings from the stock kidder redline stuff up to my current O'brien Bio front (the original orange one)/Wiley rear. I have two injuries, a broken toe ejecting from a (front) Wiley, and a torn calf muscle from an over the front stall where my rear foot did not clear the O'brien Contact binding. I believe the safest rubber bindings I ever used were the O'brien Flip-Lock bindings designed by the LaPoint's (no longer in production though some were made available to a couple of friends of mine recently).  I believe that if you eject in a certain direction, the binding won't really matter. Your foot just cannot make the rotation/angle required for a clean exit and something has to give.

I'm on a 68" Yellow, fin set to stock (6.998 tips, 2.454, .645 stem). Bindings: Obrien BIO front (30.00"), Wiley HO pattern rear.  Tied my PB (2@38) not long after getting it. Previous ski was Goode 9400.

The individual that widened the slot is a skiing buddy of mine at Okeeheelee. He used sandpapar folded over and just went back and forth to open the slot. Doesn't sound too dangerous to me. He also had the fin block milled .012 wider so it would accept all his fins (including his carbon fins). That probably took more guts, but he had a professional machinist do the work. As for finding the skis, Jodi should have stock and more coming. I believe Hotwater.cc still has some stock, but have not checked since I took delivery of my Yellow from them. Once stock is exhausted from them (and anyone else except Jodi), all skis will come exclusively from Jodi. Roger