Gloersen

IMO if your Dual-lock/G-10 plate is properly fastened in a serious OTF you will release from the double Strada boots first. I lace mine quite tight and have come out cleanly on a couple of yard sales. Clean release also with striking the buoy a few times. Both feet stay in most of the time when stuffing the tip out of the offside. The Strada's are designed pretty well with regard to release when worn properly. I would think if your G-10 separates first; such a set-up might be a bit precarious.

Pivot Point Scroll to page 42. from Rossi/Beauchesne; another brief, noteworthy perspective of not loading too much, too early

Many times rib fractures are misdiagnosed clinically. Often what occurs is an acute musculo-tendinous strain involving the intercostals muscles. The internal intercostal muscle is mainly used during forced expiration. During an impact injury the sudden increase in intrathoracic pressure can strain this tendinous insertion at the ribs impacted. The resultant micro-tears and subsequent tendinitis can be excruciatingly painful for many weeks (or longer). Like many tendinous injuries; rest, anti-inflammatories, and eventually stretching exercises.  Pull-overs (heavy weights NOT required) when properly executed can be very helpful in stretching & eventually buiding strength of the rib muscles. Do a “searc†for these types of exercises. Another consideration is stress fractures. These will not show on conventional X-Ray. Elite rowers are subject to such stress fractures. If you have been training with a rowing machine, keep this in mind.  If it continues to be painful, seek further diagnosis other than routine X-Ray.

I’ll rip on an Eleeski anytime, as long as it’s symmetrical. Deanoski: Major oversight on my part; you’re spot on. The caliper’s max displacement measuring on the Left side is approx .25†further back on the fin and thus the head of the caliper on a thinner portion of the ski. At least .006†difference from top to bottom of bevel at sidewall from two measurements roughly ¼†apart at this part of the ski’s tail. Good info. Now I can ski rip with some other pesky concern. 1000x tougher than rocket science!

It seems like on some skis a discrepancy results when measuring fin depth on one side versus the other. Occasionally a slight visual tilt can be seen as was the case with an ’09 Elite which turned out to be a flaw in the machining or casting of the mating surface on ½ of the fin block; easily cured with a file, after which the depth measured within .001 on either side.  Seen an HO A1 has a .004 disparity.  Now working on an ’11 Strada, the fin looks just fine visually when viewed from the back (maybe barely a tad tilt to the right). However depth measures 2.504 on the left (side typically measured) and 2.496 on the right. The bottom surface on either side seems perfectly symmetrical, its got to be a tilt of some sort. .008 difference just seem huge.  This gets in my head.  Anyone else ever noted these differences?  If so, what is the consensus for conventional wisdom as to which “depth†to assume is having the effect? Split the difference?......

Upon inquiry 02/22/2011; response: Hi there, Quattro won't be available till around early June. Thanks, Sirianna Troiani Customer Service Representative O’Brien Corporate Office 425-202-2134 Direct Line 425-202-2199 FAX

water is so friggin cold. sure it's not V-tach?

50water/74air Victory/Jax skied 1 set

Keep the speed - minimize deceleration/acceleration in the flat water. edge change before the reach. power triangle.

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_slLg_3Cyrvs/TQVPgybDA_I/AAAAAAAAAuU/XpuPYh3SQEM/s144/Asher%20MO%2005%20%282%29.png

Personally I note a HUGE difference here in Jax when the water gets < 660F.  This is noticed mostly with regard to unpredictable & unexpected blow-outs. Additionally it does seem more difficult to create width & space. I don’t attribute this to the ski being “faster†in cold water. Faster imo equates to getting wider & earlier, somewhat counter-intuitively, a great pass (wide & early) often feels “slow†but if theoretically covering a greater distance it must be “fasterâ€. In any event, great passes are harder to come by consistently for when temp <660F.  I suspect most of this is attributable to the increasing surface tension of water as the temp declines. As many have stated, the ski probably rides higher on the surface and this probably has a greater influence (viscosity influence as well) towards the tail of the ski creating a more level attitude (pitch), thereby creating more relative tip pressure, thus harder to get wider. Many advocate moving the fin forward ~.005†to accommodate; it makes sense. Based on blow-outs, I’m also inclined to drop the whole fin down (L:D unchanged) as well.  The greater viscosity of water with lower temps intuitively implies more friction (viscosity is essentially fluid friction) and thus, relative to warmer water, the ski’s response will be slower. It may seem like we are skiing “faster†but only because it is harder to create width & space; that is those less than desirable passes when one barely gets around each ball and felt as though they were rocketing, holding on with whatever can be mustered to complete a “fast†pass. Before ZO we would end the pass asking the driver how much + rpm adjust was added, the response being the time was a 17.12 or something disappointingly slower than expected…. Imagine skiing in molten lava, tomato soup,.....  IMHO cold water skis slower, we just ski crappier and feel like it is faster (just like a crappy warm water pass). It also hurts a lot more after the nasty blow-outs!  Who knows what happens with the ski’s flex; can’t imagine it getting anything other than less. How does carbon/resin flex vary with 300 variations in temp?  In Florida winter sucks; unequivocally.

http://www.webriggingsupply.com/pages/catalog/wirerope_cable/wirerope-galvanized.html#B scroll down, SS = $1.20/ft

6.835/2.515/.783/8w thanks

what would be the reference point most are using for the true heel position of the Strada FB? measuring from the stitch line has got to be placing the FB forward of other bindings' "heel" positions for comparative purposes. on the 67" Elite with AM fin settings at 29.25 FB (Strada) measured from stitch line, ski way overturns offside. At 28.75" with this reference point, skis quite well. Due to the shape of the shell & thickness of the liner, the heel position seems substantially forward of the "stitch line". currently measuring from the point where the heel of the liner (furthest back) meets the inside of the shell. It's good to be able to compare Apples to Apples when exchanging ski tuning information.

As per usual; too many new skis to try. From Adrenailne H2O sports: The brand new HO Syndicate A2 slalom ski is an evolution of HO Sports’ highly successful A1, which was the company’s best selling ski during its life span. The biggest difference between the two slalom skis is the A2’s new variable concave bottom. At the bindings, the concave of the A2 is the same as that of the A1, so the A2 has all the grip and edge power of the A1. But the A2 features a shallower concave at the tip and tail, giving it additional lift and speed. Designer Bob LaPoint also added more rocker in the tail, giving the A2 a quicker onside turn. The Syndicate A2 features HO Sports’ premier construction, including an incredibly lightweight PVC core and 100-percent carbon fiber reinforcements. Variable Concave Design: 3 Concave Radii in 1 ski; Larger concave radius in the tail of the ski results in the fastest tail section of any on the market. Traditional A1 concave radius under the feet produces the unmatched stability and the high edge angle the A1 is famous for. Larger concave radius fore of the ski's wide point creates the safest tip in the industry. The A2 won't stop moving as the skier moves forward through the turn into the wakes. 5-Stage Rocker Line: Dual flat spots and extremely progressive tip rocker stage. Flat spot #1 equals speed off the buoy. Flat spot #2 equals the stable platform the skier balances on back to the wakes. The progressive top rocker mimics an extra long flat spot for stability, but a continuous rocker for pre-turn rotation. Fat Tail Geometry: By reducing the overall taper in the ski, HO created a wider tail profile than traditional design. Ski Construction: 100% Carbon Fiber Reinforcements Torsional Carbon Construction Polyvinyl Chloride Foam Core Syndicate Adjustable Fin Block Handmade in the U.S.A http://lh5.ggpht.com/_slLg_3Cyrvs/TMGQl4qsvRI/AAAAAAAAArc/13NujL_UtEc/s400/11_HO_A2.jpg

HO 410: all scores entered, but only the high score is applied to the rankings. Overall T & B seems a good thing. In a September tournament (site undisclosed) just about 90% of the skiers T & B’d, making those whom opted to ski the full 3rd round wait an incredibly long time, not to mention the judges sitting in the tower for a while.  Such issues can be addresses as stated in this thread. It does add a bit of decision strategy to those electing to T&B and to those whom do not (especially if a majority do).  Consistency in the rules is essential. At this September tournament in question, about ½ the skiers decided to T&B “on the flyâ€, i.e., after they fell in Rd 2, by waving the boat down, or staying in the middle of the lake until the boat returned; a bit disorganized & improper imho.  Additionally a hand full of T&B’rs on Rd3 dropped back to their opening line length. If I had known this was possible I would have T&B’d as well. I was under the impression that a skier could only drop back to the prior line length, e.g., fall at 12m, then opening line length of Rd3 can only be as long as 13m.  Personally I think the rules should be crystal clear and would prefer:  1.)   If opting to T&B; skier MUST announce this plan to the boat driver & judge PRIOR to starting Rd2. No midstream alterations, period.  2.)   The start of T&B Rd3 can only be at 1 prior line length (preferred). Consider limiting it to the line length at which the skier failed, that would make for interesting strategy and definitely shorten tournament times, as well as certainly not “inflate†scores.

Follow Skibug's advice; the sooner the better.

Concur. Don't know if it is the water quality (quite good) of that lake or if CC has McLintock's 409 SN200 tuned particularly for slalom; that boat had a real sweet, smooth pull! Plus the coaching was good. Rip it down there!

67" Z7 ST FB 30" 6.884/2.508/.735(flat)/7w screw tabs up

Plagued with inconsistent Gates/1B & unpredictable 2B’s finally determined that the fin keeps moving; gets deeper and also a tad longer.  Tuned it to 2.506/6.880/.735/7 for last Saturday’s tournament. Skied 5 sets since, somewhat inconsistent in getting a good rhythm, measured fin at 2.515/6.883/.732  This movement had been noted about a month ago, thought the problem was due to an inadequate diameter of the bore recessed into the halves of the fin block to permit the DFT set screw unimpeded travel. Once this was determined, the set screw was used to set the fin at desired DFT, the clamp made snug, then the set screw backed all the way out from the clamping halves to permit final tightening of the fin clamp & unimpeded fixation of the fin tabs.  Then a final re-measure to verify chosen settings.  Turns out this was not the only problem. The right half (looking from top) of the fin block was improperly machined, not only the bored out recess for the DFT set screw was inadequate, so are the two recesses for the two top set screw housings on the left half of the clamp. Just visually inspecting it side by side with a new fin clamp on a club member’s new RCX; one can see at least a millimeter less radius in the bored out recesses. This of course was leading the two clamping halves tightening against themselves at the set screw housings and thus inadequate fixation of the fin tabs.  Switched to a fluid motion nylon block until the D3 fin clamp (03/10 Z7 ST) can be replaced.  In conclusion: a good reason to become proficient in fin tuning and reproducible measuring techniques; identify a potential & remedial source of inconsistent skiing. In all likelihood there may be quite a few defective fin clamp assemblies out there.Â

A1 delivers great angle out of the turn; as a result could be a tendency to under emphasize the swing between the wakes diminishing reproducible width. Â Read Raley's thoughts: Â Spray to Spray

IWWF Ratifies Parrish's World Record·        Posted by: usaws·        On: 06/27/2010 13:23:37·        In: Water SkiingThe International Waterski & Wakeboard Federation's Technical Committee has ratified U.S. water ski athlete Chris Parrish's pending men's world slalom record of 2 buoys at 43 feet off set on June 13 at the Ski Ranch June Tour 2 in Covington, La. The record surpasses the old world record of 1-1/2 buoys at 43 feet off that Parrish set in 2005.On June 12, Parrish recorded scores of 4-1/2 buoys at 41 feet off and 1-1/2 buoys at 43 feet off (twice) before posting the 2 at 43 off mark on June13. "I wanted this record bad," said Parrish, who set the new record behind the Ski Nautique 200. "I spent the entire week at the Ski Ranch getting dialed in. I had been skiing out of my mind so it felt great to be able to put everything together on Sunday." Officially in the books

http://picasaweb.google.com/USViking/VictoryLake#slideshow/5485005370171100386Have probably done 5o adjustments on the fin, always in search for a consistent offside The ski would rock for me, then my 2B's would start to fall apart. All leading to trying many different fin dimensions. Became increasingly curious as to why it seemed the depth always was greater at each re-adjust; blamed it on poor measuring technique in the hot sun. Today checked depth after each set. 1 short set, it deepened .002, 1 long set it increased from 2.512 to 2.517, loosened the clamp, knocked it back up in the block and it was back at 2.512. Took the block & fin off the ski, held the fin block halves together containing the fin, pressed by hand, the front was holding the fin, but the back not contacting the rear tab of the fin at all, not even after tightening the rear clamp hex screw, could pull the back of the fin right out easily Turns out the rear DFT set screw when placed forward past the threaded portion of the block into the recess bored out in the clamping halves was preventing the rear portion of the mating surfaces of the clamp from contacting the rear fin tab. After removing the rear set screw, the problem was solved, DFT easy enough to adjust in its absence. This would explain why in my sets I would keep getting wider & earlier into 2B (LFF) but having progressively broader turns and fighting for 3B. Looking forward to getting back some conistency. Never had a problem like this with any D3 fin block, it didn't seem to be a problem when running the fin further back & much shallower. Have been preferring of late, 2.510/6.898/.742/8(back) or at least for the first pass or two.http://picasaweb.google.com/USViking/VictoryLake#slideshow/5485005370171100386

try this link (trivalent oxygen in link) http://www.h2osmosis.com/

16 yo son enduring horrid conditions today at Victory Lake; he had to hang with 50+ yo's http://www.ballofspray.com/vanillaforum/js/tinymce/jscripts/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-cool.gif